From: Simon Horman <hidden> Date: 2014-09-03 00:49:01
The base address of the second memory region on the lager
board is 0x140000000. Update the tag used in the dts file accordingly.
This is a documentation fix and should have no run-time affect.
This problem was introduced when the second memory region
was added to the lager dts file by 62bc32a2573c4219
("ARM: shmobile: Include all 4 GiB of memory on Lager)"
in v3.14.
Reported-by: NAOYA SHIIBA <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <redacted>
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a7790-lager.dts | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
I am reposting this as Olof originally requested a syntax change,
which I followed up on, however that change no longer seems appropriate.
This this patch seems to be correct.
Dear Simon-san, Shiiba-san,
Thanks for the patch.
On 9/3/2014 9:49 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
The base address of the second memory region on the lager
board is 0x140000000. Update the tag used in the dts file accordingly.
This is a documentation fix and should have no run-time affect.
This problem was introduced when the second memory region
was added to the lager dts file by 62bc32a2573c4219
("ARM: shmobile: Include all 4 GiB of memory on Lager)"
in v3.14.
Reported-by: NAOYA SHIIBA <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <redacted>
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a7790-lager.dts | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
I am reposting this as Olof originally requested a syntax change,
which I followed up on, however that change no longer seems appropriate.
This this patch seems to be correct.
[...]
- memory at 180000000 {
+ memory at 140000000 {
Could you give more information about not using new syntax ?
I checked memblock information in both 2 ways
(i.e memory at 140000000 and memory at 1,40000000)
and I got same result.
root at lager:~# cat /sys/kernel/debug/memblock/memory
0: 0x0000000040000000..0x000000007fffffff
1: 0x0000000140000000..0x00000001ffffffff
So, what does 'no longer seems appropriate" mean ?
Hi Khiem-san,
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 11:42:57AM +0900, Khiem Nguyen wrote:
Dear Simon-san, Shiiba-san,
Thanks for the patch.
On 9/3/2014 9:49 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
quoted
The base address of the second memory region on the lager
board is 0x140000000. Update the tag used in the dts file accordingly.
This is a documentation fix and should have no run-time affect.
This problem was introduced when the second memory region
was added to the lager dts file by 62bc32a2573c4219
("ARM: shmobile: Include all 4 GiB of memory on Lager)"
in v3.14.
Reported-by: NAOYA SHIIBA <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <redacted>
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a7790-lager.dts | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
I am reposting this as Olof originally requested a syntax change,
which I followed up on, however that change no longer seems appropriate.
This this patch seems to be correct.
[...]
quoted
- memory at 180000000 {
+ memory at 140000000 {
Could you give more information about not using new syntax ?
I checked memblock information in both 2 ways
(i.e memory at 140000000 and memory at 1,40000000)
and I got same result.
root at lager:~# cat /sys/kernel/debug/memblock/memory
0: 0x0000000040000000..0x000000007fffffff
1: 0x0000000140000000..0x00000001ffffffff
So, what does 'no longer seems appropriate" mean ?
Sorry for being vague.
I am specifically referring to the conversation in
the thread "[PATCH 11/14] arm64: dts: Add initial device tree support for
EXYNOS7" and in particular the following contribution to that discussion by
Olof:
"Ok, I'm happily proven wrong here, also by confirming how this is
done on "real" OF.
According to benh:
15:20 <benh> ojn: 0,0 is not quite right, it's supposed to be used
when the two numbers are different things, like device,fn on PCI
The same is true for >2^32 unit addresses, they just use the one
integer instead of x,y.
So, I take back all I've said on this in the last 72 hours. :) It
looks like we might need to revisit some of the 32-bit DTs. Simon,
drop the series you had. :)"
An archive of the message in question is available at:
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-samsung-soc at vger.kernel.org/msg36123.html
Dear Simon-san,
On 9/3/2014 2:48 PM, Simon Horman wrote:
Hi Khiem-san,
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 11:42:57AM +0900, Khiem Nguyen wrote:
quoted
Dear Simon-san, Shiiba-san,
Thanks for the patch.
On 9/3/2014 9:49 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
quoted
The base address of the second memory region on the lager
board is 0x140000000. Update the tag used in the dts file accordingly.
This is a documentation fix and should have no run-time affect.
This problem was introduced when the second memory region
was added to the lager dts file by 62bc32a2573c4219
("ARM: shmobile: Include all 4 GiB of memory on Lager)"
in v3.14.
Reported-by: NAOYA SHIIBA <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <redacted>
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a7790-lager.dts | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
I am reposting this as Olof originally requested a syntax change,
which I followed up on, however that change no longer seems appropriate.
This this patch seems to be correct.
[...]
quoted
- memory at 180000000 {
+ memory at 140000000 {
Could you give more information about not using new syntax ?
I checked memblock information in both 2 ways
(i.e memory at 140000000 and memory at 1,40000000)
and I got same result.
root at lager:~# cat /sys/kernel/debug/memblock/memory
0: 0x0000000040000000..0x000000007fffffff
1: 0x0000000140000000..0x00000001ffffffff
So, what does 'no longer seems appropriate" mean ?
Sorry for being vague.
I am specifically referring to the conversation in
the thread "[PATCH 11/14] arm64: dts: Add initial device tree support for
EXYNOS7" and in particular the following contribution to that discussion by
Olof:
"Ok, I'm happily proven wrong here, also by confirming how this is
done on "real" OF.
According to benh:
15:20 <benh> ojn: 0,0 is not quite right, it's supposed to be used
when the two numbers are different things, like device,fn on PCI
The same is true for >2^32 unit addresses, they just use the one
integer instead of x,y.
So, I take back all I've said on this in the last 72 hours. :) It
looks like we might need to revisit some of the 32-bit DTs. Simon,
drop the series you had. :)"
An archive of the message in question is available at:
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-samsung-soc at vger.kernel.org/msg36123.html
OK. I understood.
Let's follow the right way. :)
--
Best regards,
KHIEM Nguyen
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 03:22:14PM +0900, Khiem Nguyen wrote:
Dear Simon-san,
On 9/3/2014 2:48 PM, Simon Horman wrote:
quoted
Hi Khiem-san,
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 11:42:57AM +0900, Khiem Nguyen wrote:
quoted
Dear Simon-san, Shiiba-san,
Thanks for the patch.
On 9/3/2014 9:49 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
quoted
The base address of the second memory region on the lager
board is 0x140000000. Update the tag used in the dts file accordingly.
This is a documentation fix and should have no run-time affect.
This problem was introduced when the second memory region
was added to the lager dts file by 62bc32a2573c4219
("ARM: shmobile: Include all 4 GiB of memory on Lager)"
in v3.14.
Reported-by: NAOYA SHIIBA <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <redacted>
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a7790-lager.dts | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
I am reposting this as Olof originally requested a syntax change,
which I followed up on, however that change no longer seems appropriate.
This this patch seems to be correct.
[...]
quoted
- memory at 180000000 {
+ memory at 140000000 {
Could you give more information about not using new syntax ?
I checked memblock information in both 2 ways
(i.e memory at 140000000 and memory at 1,40000000)
and I got same result.
root at lager:~# cat /sys/kernel/debug/memblock/memory
0: 0x0000000040000000..0x000000007fffffff
1: 0x0000000140000000..0x00000001ffffffff
So, what does 'no longer seems appropriate" mean ?
Sorry for being vague.
I am specifically referring to the conversation in
the thread "[PATCH 11/14] arm64: dts: Add initial device tree support for
EXYNOS7" and in particular the following contribution to that discussion by
Olof:
"Ok, I'm happily proven wrong here, also by confirming how this is
done on "real" OF.
According to benh:
15:20 <benh> ojn: 0,0 is not quite right, it's supposed to be used
when the two numbers are different things, like device,fn on PCI
The same is true for >2^32 unit addresses, they just use the one
integer instead of x,y.
So, I take back all I've said on this in the last 72 hours. :) It
looks like we might need to revisit some of the 32-bit DTs. Simon,
drop the series you had. :)"
An archive of the message in question is available at:
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-samsung-soc at vger.kernel.org/msg36123.html