On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 17:34:19 +0200
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Monday 16 April 2012, Hiroshi Doyu wrote:
> > What about using "dma-window" property to specify IOVA range in dtsi as below?
> >
> > arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c:
> >
> > 698 static int __init cell_iommu_get_window(struct device_node *np,
> > 699 unsigned long *base,
> > 700 unsigned long *size)
> > 701 {
> > 702 const void *dma_window;
> > 703 unsigned long index;
> > 704
> > 705 /* Use ibm,dma-window if available, else, hard code ! */
> > 706 dma_window = of_get_property(np, "ibm,dma-window", NULL);
> > 707 if (dma_window == NULL) { ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > 708 *base = 0;
> > 709 *size = 0x80000000u;
> > 710 return -ENODEV;
> > 711 }
> > 712
> > 713 of_parse_dma_window(np, dma_window, &index, base, size);
> > 714 return 0;
> > 715 }
> >
>
> Yes, that's the right way to do it, but I would use the more generic
> "dma-window" name rather than "ibm,dma-window", which was originally
> introduced for pseries and for some reason copied into the cell qs2x
> firmware.
Which name is better, "dma-window" or "iova-window"?
Considering DMA IOMMU mapping API, "dma-window" may sound appropriate to me.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
