[PATCH Resend] ARM: EXYNOS: Map SYSRAM address through DT

Sachin Kamat sachin.kamat at linaro.org
Tue Apr 29 21:09:54 PDT 2014

Hi Heiko,

On 16 April 2014 22:55, Heiko Stübner <heiko at sntech.de> wrote:
> Hi,
> Am Mittwoch, 16. April 2014, 16:35:36 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
>> On Wednesday 16 April 2014 17:20:51 Sachin Kamat wrote:
>> > Instead of hardcoding the SYSRAM details for each SoC,
>> > pass this information through device tree (DT) and make
>> > the code SoC agnostic.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat at linaro.org>
>> > ---
>> > Rebased on latest linux-next.
>> Thanks for sending this again. I'd like Heiko to have a look
>> and provide an Ack if he's happy with it.
>> It seems similar to what he did with the SRAM for mach-rockchip,
>> and if it is we should use the same binding that he introduced,
>> which would be a minor variation of this.
> The sram binding is derived from the generic reserved-memory bindings to
> enable the sram in general to be used generically through the sram driver,
> while still retaining some areas for special purposes, like the smp-trampoline
> in my case.
> From my reading of platsmp.c, it looks like offset+0x4 starts the so called
> boot-registesr, which get the smp-start-address written to.
> So I guess it all depends on what is contained in the rest of the sysram. If
> it is all covered with such special registers or other special uses, the code
> below is fine. But if the most of the area is just general purpose sram, a
> solution like on rockchip might be nicer - i.e. handling the sysram via the
> sram driver and declaring a reserved section for the boot registers.

Thanks for your inputs. In our case, we use sram for secondary boot
addresses but could not find any other general purpose use.

> So, depending on the above:
> Acked-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko at sntech.de>

So I believe your ack applies to our case :). Thanks again.

With warm regards,

More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list