> -----Original Message----- > From: Felipe Contreras [mailto:felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 5:05 PM > To: Kanigeri, Hari > Cc: Marathe, Yogesh; Premi, Sanjeev; Tony Lindgren; linux-arm- > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] omap3: Remove non-existent config > option > > Hi Hari, > > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 7:28 PM, Kanigeri, Hari <h- > kanigeri2@xxxxxx> wrote: > > Yogesh is coming from dsplink requirement to use iommu. I see his > comment as why Bridge requirement should be imposed on other IPCs > that need iommu. > > Ahh, that explains a lot. However, dsp-link can just enable > CONFIG_MPU_BRIDGE_IOMMU, and that's it, right? Perhaps it would > make > sense to rename to CONFIG_OMAP_IOMMU_IVA2, or something like > that. But > not remove it and break tidspbridge, which is already in staging. > > Once both are working happily with CONFIG_OMAP_IOMMU_IVA2 on, > _then_ > it can be removed. > > -- > Felipe Contreras Felipe, dsplink and syslink (two drivers who use iommu) should not enable CONFIG_MPU_BRIDGE_IOMMU as dspbridge and dsplink /syslink can not co-exist as they are using same resources. Not applying patch breaks dsplink/sylink any one which is being used. Defining this config makes them co-exist. I'm ok with changing name to CONFIG_OMAP_IOMMU_IVA2 but ideally then that will also break the dspbridge. One more way would be to soure revert the patch and apply on dspbridge branch if it breaks the builds on that branch rather than breaking others in master. Regards, Yogesh. -- 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
