On 05/15/2012 09:25 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 15 May 2012, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: >> Le Tue, 15 May 2012 14:53:45 +0100, >> Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit : >> >>> Since the two board support files are identical, except for the names >>> they print, I'd say this is the job of one file. It can always be >>> split later. >> >> The initial motivation for keeping two files here is that the two SoC >> have a different number of PCIe memory areas, and those areas are >> typically mapped in ->map_io(). However: >> >> * Maybe those mappings can be done using a normal ioremap() rather >> than in ->map_io(), according to DT informations (but most other ARM >> SoC support at the moment seem to do PCI mappings using static >> mappings in ->map_io) > > I'm pretty sure we can use ioremap for new PCI implementations now. > Also, you can scan the device tree in map_io() if necesary, to see which > PCIe ports are enabled. For the i/o windows, they should be static because we want a fixed virtual address across platforms. 0xfef00000 is the planned address. Memory windows should be ioremap. Rob _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel