Re: fast_iob() vs PHYS_OFFSET

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

 



Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 12:20:17PM +0000, Måns Rullgård wrote:
>> My concern is over systems like AR7.  It defines PHYS_OFFSET to
>> 0x14000000 and UNCAC_BASE, correspondingly, to 0xb4000000.  According to
>> the linux-mips wiki, there is some on-chip RAM at physical address 0,
>> which explains why the __fast_iob() macro works there.
>
> there is really on-chip RAM for AR7 at address 0. The AR7 CPU core
> is only MIPS32r1, so it doesn't have the exception vector base register
> and needs ram at physical address 0 for exception handlers (which all
> older cores do). I can't check right now, but even IP28 should have
> some memory mirrored there. The problem on IP28 is that accessing
> memory uncached requires reprogramming the memory controller (which
> then doesn't fit the concept of fast_iob()).

Well, that explains why it works on AR7.  It still doesn't tell me the
correct way to handle a 74k-based chip (MIPS32r2) with RAM starting at
physical address 0x04000000.

-- 
Måns Rullgård
mans@xxxxxxxxx





[Index of Archives]     [Linux MIPS Home]     [LKML Archive]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux]     [Git]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]

  Powered by Linux