On Tue 31 Jan 04:35 PST 2017, Loic Pallardy wrote:
> Remoteproc doesn't check if firmware requests fixed
> addresses for carveout regions.
> Current assumption is that platform specific driver is in
> charge of coprocessor specific memory region allocation and
> remoteproc core doesn't have to handle them.
> If a da or a pa is specified in firmware resource table, remoteproc
> core doesn't have to perform any allocation.
> Access to carveout will be done thanks to rproc_da_to_pa function,
> which will provide virtual address on carveout region allocated
> by platform specific driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Loic Pallardy <loic.pallardy@xxxxxx>
> ---
> No change since V1
>
> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index 90b05c7..dd63ceed 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -622,6 +622,11 @@ static int rproc_handle_carveout(struct rproc *rproc,
> dev_dbg(dev, "carveout rsc: name: %s, da 0x%x, pa 0x%x, len 0x%x, flags 0x%x\n",
> rsc->name, rsc->da, rsc->pa, rsc->len, rsc->flags);
>
> + if (rsc->pa != FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY || rsc->da != FW_RSC_ADDR_ANY) {
For devices with an IOMMU it's valid to specify "da" and have the
allocated region mapped there. So this is not correct.
Regards,
Bjorn
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-remoteproc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
