Hi, >>> memcpy_from/to_io() use word aligned accesses on the io side of >>> memory. >>> The MPC5200 local plus bus where our flashes are connected does not >>> allow unaligned accesses, so we have to use the io versions of memcpy. >> >> But this region of flash is marked as suitable for execute-in-place, >> otherwise the point() function wouldn't be working to give a direct >> pointer to it. It sounds like we shouldn't be allowing that. >> >> Which in turn means that perhaps we should have a property in the >> corresponding node in the device-tree which indicates that it's not >> suitable for direct access? > > This isn't usually a property of the flash device, but of the various > buses/controllers above the flash device.
I wholeheartedly agree. After all, its the Local+ bus playing games here. And fixing that for JFFS2 only ignores that other devices can *and will* be connected on this bus. Unaligned accesses to such devices will also fail (likely from mtd unrelated code) - and fail silently, taking quite a while to figure out what is going wrong where. > The device tree should mimic reality (and it does, it just seems the > kernel doesn't use this information yet?) How is this exactly supposed to work? Cheers Detlev -- In the topologic hell the beer is packed in Klein's bottles. -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-40 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
