On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 11:18:36, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote: [...] > >> > >> For the duplicate ioremapping, I don't think there's any need to > >> do it if we get things right. > > > > Note that if the ioremap matches a static map area there is no cost to > > ioremap it multiple times. > > > > > Thats true though now on OMAP we removed most of the static mappings. > The main issue is waste of IO space because, we end up mapping same > area two times for all the OMAP drivers. This can be optimized with > a arch ioremap caller hook but as discussed here, its nice to have > rather than something important. > Err.. I was looking at the iotable_init for OMAPx in mainline and it looks like most (all?) of the peripherals are already covered in the static mappings? Regards, Vaibhav -- 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
