Subash Patel wrote:
Hi KyongHo, Kukjin,
On 03/15/2012 08:09 PM, Kukjin Kim wrote:
On 03/15/12 04:12, Joerg Roedel wrote:
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 05:32:39PM +0900, Cho KyongHo wrote:
KyongHo, I looked at 'Cho KyongHo <pullip.cho ...>' and 'KyongHo Cho
<pullip.cho ...>' in this series, which one do you want to use?
Handling System MMUs with an identifier is not flexible to manage
System MMU platform devices because of the following reasons:
1. A device driver which needs to handle System MMU must know the ID.
2. A System MMU may not present in some implementations of Exynos
family.
3. Handling System MMU with IOMMU API does not require an ID.
This patch is the result of removing ID of System MMUs.
Instead, a device driver that needs to handle its System MMU must
use IOMMU API while its descriptor of platform device is given.
This patch also includes the following enhancements:
- A System MMU device becomes a child if its power domain device.
- clkdev
Cc: Kukjin Kim<kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: KyongHo Cho<pullip.cho@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig | 10 +-
arch/arm/mach-exynos/Makefile | 2 +-
arch/arm/mach-exynos/clock-exynos4.c | 79 ++--
arch/arm/mach-exynos/clock-exynos4.h | 2 +
arch/arm/mach-exynos/clock-exynos4210.c | 11 +
arch/arm/mach-exynos/clock-exynos4212.c | 28 ++-
arch/arm/mach-exynos/clock-exynos5.c | 90 +++++
arch/arm/mach-exynos/dev-sysmmu.c | 457 ++++++++++++----------
arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/irqs.h | 25 +-
arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/map.h | 38 ++
arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/regs-clock.h | 5 +
arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/regs-sysmmu.h | 28 --
arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/sysmmu.h | 88 +++--
arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-armlex4210.c | 1 -
arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-smdkv310.c | 1 -
15 files changed, 529 insertions(+), 336 deletions(-)
delete mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/regs-sysmmu.h
This patch doesn't apply cleanly against upstream Linux (v3.3-rcX).
Please rebase to upstream and resend. The other 2 patches apply fine.
Yes, as KyoungHo said, this has been created on top of Samsung tree
for-next because this touches many exynos stuff which has been changed
from Samsung tree for upcoming merge window. So if you're ok on this,
1st patch and this should be sent to upstream via samsung tree even
though I can't find any topic branch for this yet. And if you want
topic branch for your tree, let me know, I can provide it.
Thanks.
Wouldn't it be good to send exynos4 SYSMMU patches now, and send only
the exynos5 delta when your for-next(exynos5) changes
Hmm, it can be a solution for this, but I'm not sure exynos4 and exynos5
can be splitted.
get merged to mainline? Manually editing the patches is really pain-some
YES, absolutely. Nobody like it.
and sometimes error-some :( Can this patch in particular
be split?
Hmm...
Now we don't have much time for upcoming merge window, and this should
be in linux-next before open merge window.
Anyway Joerg, how do you want to handle this? Do you want to pick up
1/2/3 all of them in your tree? If so, 2nd patch should be on top of
some samsung topic stuff.
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
