* Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [080904 02:47]:
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 11:33:51AM -0400, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> > > @@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ static struct omap_mcbsp_platform_data omap730_mcbsp_pdata[] = {
> > > #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP15XX
> > > static struct omap_mcbsp_platform_data omap15xx_mcbsp_pdata[] = {
> > > {
> > > - .virt_base = OMAP1510_MCBSP1_BASE,
> > > + .virt_base = OMAP1510_MCBSP1_BASE, /* FIXME: virtual or physical */
> > AFAIK, OMAP1510_MCBSP1_BASE is physical. So, I'd say:
> > + .virt_base = IO_ADDRESS(OMAP1510_MCBSP1_BASE),
> >
> > Because, plat-omap/mcbsp.c expect .virt_base to be a virtual address.
>
> And today, the story is completely different, having looked through more
> of the code and some documentation.
>
> - OMAPxxxx_MCBSPx_BASE are all physical addresses. Fine.
> - physical addresses > 0xfffb0000 are subject to an offset (IO_OFFSET)
> but others for the DSP located and DSP shared peripherals aren't.
>
> So, applying the IO_OFFSET via IO_ADDRESS() or io_p2v() to all addresses
> breaks. Meaning it's completely random whether something should be put
> through IO_ADDRESS() and similar.
>
> This isn't obvious. It isn't readable. It isn't maintainable. It doesn't
> lend itself to compile time checking.
Ouch. Looking at the history of the mcbsp.c the MCBSPX_BASE defines have
been a mix of virt and phys addresses to start with.
Looks like in the short term we need to define both virt_base and phys_base
for omap_mcbsp_platform_data.
Then define __arch_ioremap that understands also the DSP mappings and get
rid of the remaining hardcoded virtual DSP defines.
At that point we can also remove the virt_base from omap_mcbsp_platform_data.
Tony
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
