Re: [PATCH] ARM: EXYNOS: Add 5800 SoC support

[Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>]

On 05/23/14 16:34, Arun Kumar K wrote:
> Exynos5800 is an octa core SoC which is based on the 5420
> platform. This patch adds the basic support for it in the
> mach-exynos.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arun Kumar K<arun.kk@samsung.com>
> ---
>   arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig   |    5 +++++
>   arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h  |   11 ++++++++++-
>   arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c |    2 +-
>   3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
> index 4663417..c5423da 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
> @@ -99,6 +99,11 @@ config SOC_EXYNOS5440
>   	help
>   	  Enable EXYNOS5440 SoC support
>
> +config SOC_EXYNOS5800
> +	bool "SAMSUNG EXYNOS5800"
> +	default y
> +	depends on SOC_EXYNOS5420
> +
>   endmenu
>
>   config EXYNOS5420_MCPM
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h
> index ae5f648..8fbc55b 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h
> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
>   #define EXYNOS5250_SOC_ID	0x43520000
>   #define EXYNOS5420_SOC_ID	0xE5420000
>   #define EXYNOS5440_SOC_ID	0xE5440000
> +#define EXYNOS5800_SOC_ID	0xE5422000
>   #define EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK	0xFFFFF000
>
>   extern unsigned long samsung_cpu_id;
> @@ -39,6 +40,7 @@ IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos4412, EXYNOS4412_CPU_ID, EXYNOS4_CPU_MASK)
>   IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5250, EXYNOS5250_SOC_ID, EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
>   IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5420, EXYNOS5420_SOC_ID, EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
>   IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5440, EXYNOS5440_SOC_ID, EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
> +IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5800, EXYNOS5800_SOC_ID, EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
>
>   #if defined(CONFIG_CPU_EXYNOS4210)
>   # define soc_is_exynos4210()	is_samsung_exynos4210()
> @@ -80,9 +82,16 @@ IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5440, EXYNOS5440_SOC_ID, EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
>   # define soc_is_exynos5440()	0
>   #endif
>
> +#if defined(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5800)
> +# define soc_is_exynos5800()	is_samsung_exynos5800()
> +#else
> +# define soc_is_exynos5800()	0
> +#endif
> +
>   #define soc_is_exynos4() (soc_is_exynos4210() || soc_is_exynos4212() || \
>   			  soc_is_exynos4412())
> -#define soc_is_exynos5() (soc_is_exynos5250() || soc_is_exynos5420())
> +#define soc_is_exynos5() (soc_is_exynos5250() || soc_is_exynos5420() || \
> +			  soc_is_exynos5800())
>
>   void mct_init(void __iomem *base, int irq_g0, int irq_l0, int irq_l1);
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c
> index 9c16da2..112bc66 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c
> @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ static inline void __iomem *cpu_boot_reg(int cpu)
>   		return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
>   	if (soc_is_exynos4412())
>   		boot_reg += 4*cpu;
> -	else if (soc_is_exynos5420())
> +	else if (soc_is_exynos5420() || soc_is_exynos5800())
>   		boot_reg += 4;
>   	return boot_reg;
>   }

+ Arnd, Olof

Hmm...yeah, 5800 doesn't boot without this and 3250 is also same 
situation. In this time, soc_is_exynos0000() is required and I think, we 
need to sort it out next time. Let's do one by one...;)

Arnd, Olof how do you think about this? I agree with Olof's suggestion 
that we need to add only dt for new SoC but we need more time...

Thanks,
Kukjin