On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 04:32:07 +0200
Mark Zhang [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 06/26/2012 07:46 PM, Mark Zhang wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:55:13 +0200
Thierry Reding [off-list ref] wrote:

...

quoted

quoted

I'm not sure I understand how information about the carveout would be
obtained from the IOMMU API, though.

I think that can be similar with current gart implementation. Define carveout as:

carveout {
        compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-carveout";
        size = <0x10000000>;
};

Then create a file such like "tegra-carveout.c" to get these definitions and

register itself as platform device's iommu instance.

The carveout isn't a HW object, so it doesn't seem appropriate to define a DT
node to represent it.
--

Yes. But I think it's better to export the size of carveout as a configurable item.
So we need to define this somewhere. How about define carveout as a property of gart?

I agree that the carveout size should be configurable. But it may not be related to gart.