From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel =?iso-8859-1?Q?Engstr=F6m?= Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 08:35:20 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] New x86 board booted...now the hard part In-Reply-To: <20030523190057.GA9490@buici.com>; from elf@buici.com on fre, maj 23, 2003 at 21:00:57 +0200 References: <20030523190057.GA9490@buici.com> Message-ID: <20030526083520.T16977@jupiter.omicron.se> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 2003.05.23 21:00 Marc Singer wrote: > Yipee! It boots. Very good, now there are three of us. > 1) Daniel, do you think that the 'fs' overrides in mem_init are > necessary when ds == fs? No, that's a left-over from AMDs 16bit code kit which need to use segment overrides. > 2) How would you expect to override mem_init on another x86 board? Conditional compilation of sc520_asm.S it is, after all, sc520-specific. The defines in sc520_asm.S and sc520.c are not there yet, but they should look like most othe U-boot code: #ifdef CONFIG_SC520 ..... #endif I think it is cleaner to do this kind of things in the makefile, but it is not how the U-boot amkefiles are done. > It seems to me that we'd be better off with a BSP entry point for > RAM initialization that calls the appropriate library > function(s). mem_init is the BSP entry point for RAM initialization. Calling library functions before mem_init is done is not advisabe. > 3) We ought to be able to share serial driver code between x86 and > the risc processors as long as we abstract port accesses the > way that the Linux kernel does. Has this been discussed? Sure, we should be able to share. No, I have not investigated how that would be done. When I started the 386-port, I looked in a few directories under cpu/* for what cpu/i386 should contain. All CPU-subdirs I checked contined a serial driver, so I borrowed a 16550 version (from the 405GP i think) and included it slightly modified in cpu/i386. /Daniel