Hi all, On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 04:29:17PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote: > From: Thierry Reding <tred...@nvidia.com> > > This commit introduces a generic device tree binding for IOMMU devices. > Only a very minimal subset is described here, but it is enough to cover > the requirements of both the Exynos System MMU and Tegra SMMU as > discussed here: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/27/346 > > Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <tred...@nvidia.com> > --- > Changes in v4: > - clarify that disabling an IOMMU DT node may not disable translation > - be more explicit that examples are only examples > - add multi-ID master example > > Changes in v3: > - use #iommu-cells instead of #address-cells/#size-cells > - drop optional iommu-names property > > Changes in v2: > - add notes about "dma-ranges" property (drop note from commit message) > - document priorities of "iommus" property vs. "dma-ranges" property > - drop #iommu-cells in favour of #address-cells and #size-cells > - remove multiple-master device example > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/iommu.txt | 172 > ++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 172 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/iommu.txt
I'm concerned that this patch hasn't been picked up for 3.17 (I can't see it in -next). If we want to move the ARM SMMU driver over to this new binding, we can't keep dragging our feet for much longer as I *really* don't plan to support two bindings in parallel (one is complicated enough already). Any chance we can see this merged, please? Will _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
