Hi Magnus, On Tuesday 16 December 2014 07:44:32 Magnus Damm wrote: > On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 3:44 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Monday 15 December 2014 14:07:52 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 1:13 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >> > Add the seven IPMMU instances found in the r8a7791 to DT with a > >> > disabled status. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart > >> > <laurent.pinchart+rene...@ideasonboard.com> > >> > >> The addresses and interrupt numbers look OK to me. > >> However, my comment about the "0x800" offset is still valid. > >> Shouldn't we have two register blocks, and let the driver use only the > >> second one? > >> > >> If you ignore, feel free to add my > >> Acked-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+rene...@glider.be> > > > > I don't want to ignore your comment, but I don't know what to do here :-/ > > The datasheet lacks detailed information about secure vs. non-secure mode > > and how the two register sets are supposed to interoperate and be handled > > by the operating system. > > I don't know about that either. > > But how about differences within R-Car Gen2 series so far? If there > are known differences then perhaps we should use part number in the > compatible string?
I haven't noticed differences between H2 and M2. V2 and E2 are extended with IOMMU performance monitoring registers, so a specific compatible string is needed. "renesas,ipmmu-vmsa" should be the default fallback compatible string. I was thinking about playing with the newer SoCs first to see how the IOMMU react and then most likely add SoC-specific compatible strings. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
