On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Thomas Abraham wrote: > On 12 October 2011 22:00, Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 12 October 2011 21:43, Rob Herring <robherring2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 10/10/2011 03:11 AM, Thomas Abraham wrote: > >>> ioremap() request for statically remapped regions are intercepted and the > >>> statically assigned virtual address is returned. For requests for which > >>> there are no statically remapped regions, the requests are let through. > >>> > >>> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> arch/arm/mach-exynos4/cpu.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > >>> arch/arm/mach-exynos4/include/mach/io.h | 4 ++++ > >>> 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >>> > >> > >> You won't need this with Nico's vmalloc.h clean-up series. It does > >> exactly this but generically for all platforms. > > > > Ok. Thanks for your suggestion. I will move to using Nico's patches. > > From Nico's reply to his pull request of vmalloc cleanup series, it > looks like that pull request has been withdrawn (hope I am not missing > anything here). I'm just postponing it because this depends on a large cleanup in the OMAP code which is being pushed to mainline for the next merge window. > Without Nico's series, and gic dt support for exynos4 support > requiring this patch, all other workarounds to replace this patch does > not seem be correct. > > So is it acceptable to retain this patch and later rework/drop the > exynos4 specific ioremap along with Nico's vmalloc patch series when > it is merged. I would guess so. But please CC me on those patches so I know what to look for when rebasing my series. Nicolas
 |