Re: [3/4] ARM: EXYNOS: Remove static mapping of SCU SFR

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Pankaj,

On 11/07/2016 08:05 AM, pankaj.dubey wrote:
Hi Alim,

On Friday 04 November 2016 06:56 PM, Alim Akhtar wrote:
Hi Pankaj,

On 11/04/2016 09:09 AM, Pankaj Dubey wrote:
Lets remove static mapping of SCU SFR mainly used in CORTEX-A9 SoC
based boards.
Instead use mapping from device tree node of SCU.

Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
   arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c                | 22
----------------------
   arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/map.h      |  2 --
   arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c               | 18 +++++++++++-------
   arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c                    | 14 +++++++++++---
   arch/arm/mach-exynos/suspend.c               | 15 +++++++++++----
   arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/map-s5p.h |  4 ----
   6 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
index 757fc11..fa08ef9 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
@@ -28,15 +28,6 @@

   #include "common.h"

-static struct map_desc exynos4_iodesc[] __initdata = {
-    {
-        .virtual    = (unsigned long)S5P_VA_COREPERI_BASE,
-        .pfn        = __phys_to_pfn(EXYNOS4_PA_COREPERI),
-        .length        = SZ_8K,
-        .type        = MT_DEVICE,
-    },
-};
-
   static struct platform_device exynos_cpuidle = {
       .name              = "exynos_cpuidle",
   #ifdef CONFIG_ARM_EXYNOS_CPUIDLE
@@ -99,17 +90,6 @@ static int __init exynos_fdt_map_chipid(unsigned
long node, const char *uname,
       return 1;
   }

-/*
- * exynos_map_io
- *
- * register the standard cpu IO areas
- */
-static void __init exynos_map_io(void)
-{
-    if (soc_is_exynos4())
-        iotable_init(exynos4_iodesc, ARRAY_SIZE(exynos4_iodesc));
-}
-
   static void __init exynos_init_io(void)
   {
       debug_ll_io_init();
@@ -118,8 +98,6 @@ static void __init exynos_init_io(void)

       /* detect cpu id and rev. */
       s5p_init_cpu(S5P_VA_CHIPID);
-
-    exynos_map_io();
   }

   /*
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/map.h
b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/map.h
index 5fb0040..0eef407 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/map.h
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/map.h
@@ -18,6 +18,4 @@

   #define EXYNOS_PA_CHIPID        0x10000000

-#define EXYNOS4_PA_COREPERI        0x10500000
-
   #endif /* __ASM_ARCH_MAP_H */
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c
b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c
index a5d6841..553d0d9 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c
@@ -224,11 +224,6 @@ static void write_pen_release(int val)
       sync_cache_w(&pen_release);
   }

-static void __iomem *scu_base_addr(void)
-{
-    return (void __iomem *)(S5P_VA_SCU);
-}
-
   static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(boot_lock);

   static void exynos_secondary_init(unsigned int cpu)
@@ -387,14 +382,23 @@ fail:

   static void __init exynos_smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus)
   {
+    struct device_node *np;
+    void __iomem *scu_base;
       int i;

       exynos_sysram_init();

       exynos_set_delayed_reset_assertion(true);

-    if (read_cpuid_part() == ARM_CPU_PART_CORTEX_A9)
-        scu_enable(scu_base_addr());
+    if (read_cpuid_part() == ARM_CPU_PART_CORTEX_A9) {
+        np = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "arm,cortex-a9-scu");

what if of_find_compatible_node() fails? May be add a error check for
the same?

Thanks for review.

You are right of_find_compatible_node() is bound to fail, but only in
case supplied compatible is missing in DT. In our case this piece of
code will execute only for Cortex-A9 based SoC (which in case of Exynos
SoC is applicable only for Exynos4 series) and we will for sure
providing "arm,cortex-a9-scu" in DT, so there is no chance of failure.
So I feel extra check on "np" for NULL will add no benefit here.

Well I am not entirely convenience here, I still feel it better to have those check, lets not assume anything about future, but when I see of_find_compatible_node() uses elsewhere in kernel, both kind of uses are there (with/without error check). So, I leave it to you and maintainer to take a call on this, otherwise this patch looks good.

Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@xxxxxxxxxxx>


Thanks,
Pankaj Dubey


--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux SoC Development]     [Linux Rockchip Development]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux SCSI]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux