Hi Hiroshi,
> -----Original Message----- > From: Hiroshi DOYU [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2010 4:28 AM > To: Kanigeri, Hari > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Gupta, Ramesh > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] omap: iommu-add functionality to get TLB miss > interrupt > > From: "ext Kanigeri, Hari" <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] omap: iommu-add functionality to get TLB miss > interrupt > Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 19:03:55 +0200 > > >> > diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/iommu.h b/arch/arm/plat- > >> omap/include/plat/iommu.h > >> > index 0752af9..52a3852 100644 > >> > --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/iommu.h > >> > +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/iommu.h > >> > @@ -80,6 +80,7 @@ struct iommu_functions { > >> > > >> > int (*enable)(struct iommu *obj); > >> > void (*disable)(struct iommu *obj); > >> > + void (*disable_twl)(struct iommu *obj); > >> > u32 (*fault_isr)(struct iommu *obj, u32 *ra); > >> > > >> > void (*tlb_read_cr)(struct iommu *obj, struct cr_regs *cr); > >> > @@ -143,6 +144,7 @@ extern void iotlb_cr_to_e(struct cr_regs *cr, > struct > > Just one thought, isn't the following a little bit flexible? > > - void (*disable_twl)(struct iommu *obj); > + void (*set_twl)(struct iommu *obj, int on); -- Probabaly if one want to toggle between enabling and disabling twl during run time. I agree with you about the change so that this can be flexible in future. I will make this change. Thank you for your inputs. Thank you, Best regards, Hari -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
