On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Tomi Valkeinen [off-list ref] wrote:
On 13/11/14 16:46, Hans de Goede wrote:
quoted
Hi,
On 11/13/2014 03:28 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
quoted
On 13/11/14 15:34, Hans de Goede wrote:
quoted
+chosen {
+ framebuffer0: framebuffer@5fc00000 {
compatible = "simple-framebuffer";
- reg = <0x1d385000 (1600 * 1200 * 2)>;
+ reg = <0x5fc00000 (4096 * 1024)>;
Was there a reason for this change?
I changed the node name to match the new bindings text which
specifies that the node name must be framebuffer@<address>,
while at it I've taken a real world address range.
I assume you refer to the bit where the size of the reg property
is changed ? That indeed is not really necessary.
Yes, I meant the size of the reg prop. As this is an example, I think it
should be as clear as possible.
I guess a valid use case here is to set the size to larger-than-needed,
so that it gets preallocated and you don't need to worry about getting
the memory later when the system has already been running for a longer
time. But if that's the case in this example, I think it would be better
to describe it explicitly.
Besides, we already have a mechanism for that called /reserved-memory.
Any memory used by a framebuffer needs to be described in the reserved
map anyway, and that region can be made larger than the firmware
configured framebuffer.
g.