On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:39:06AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 08:25:30AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > > The address decoding window to access the BootROM should not be > > allocated programatically, but instead declared in the device tree. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.gar...@free-electrons.com> > > arch/arm/mach-mvebu/platsmp.c | 1 - > > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/platsmp.c b/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/platsmp.c > > index 93f2f3a..d419fac 100644 > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/platsmp.c > > @@ -118,7 +118,6 @@ void __init armada_xp_smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int > > max_cpus) > > set_secondary_cpus_clock(); > > flush_cache_all(); > > set_cpu_coherent(cpu_logical_map(smp_processor_id()), 0); > > - mvebu_mbus_add_window("bootrom", 0xfff00000, SZ_1M); > > } > > I think some kind of test is needed here. As I understand it the SMP > startup uses a trampoline in the boot rom and the boot rom *must* be > mapped to 0xfff00000 ? >
Yes, that's my understanding as well, but I will do some testing since it should be interesting... > Verifying the DT is setup this way and aborting if it is not seems > like a good idea.. > I have no problem doing that, but to me it sounds as it's the responsability of the one that writes the DT, no? Maybe this is a requirement for this SoC, but not for another... so, why should the kernel *check* for that? -- Ezequiel GarcĂa, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering http://free-electrons.com _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss