linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kenneth Johansson <kenneth@southpole.se>
To: Fortini Matteo <matteo.fortini@mta.it>
Cc: "u-boot@lists.denx.de" <u-boot@lists.denx.de>,
	Roberto Guerra <roberto.j.guerra@gmail.com>,
	"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Linux seamless booting
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 14:22:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1255436545.4918.70.camel@kenjo-laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4AD33533.5030900@mta.it>

On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 15:54 +0200, Fortini Matteo wrote:
> Yes, that's what we're currently using, but the problem is a little 
> broader: I should answer to CAN messages in at most 100-200ms from 
> powerup, and that can be done in u-boot.

if you are in that interval you definitely need to go to a more exotic
start sequence than usual. 

one solution would be to do as you suggest and do a special driver that
is living outside of the kernel during startup. you still need to hack
into the interrupt code to let your "external" driver handle the CAN.
then you need to hack up the ordinary driver to take over from yours.

I have not seen this solution on any project I worked on but should be
doable. 

optimizing the boot time of linux so it starts up in 200ms is probably
going to be quite hard. I did 2 seconds to /sbin/init started from ide
driver without to much trouble. removing the IDE and going to a root on
NOR would probably get closer to 1.5 but to get down to 200ms would
probably mean removing most of u-boot and only keep the dram setup then
you probably need to remove most of the drivers from the kernel and load
them later as modules. I have never really tried to do a insane fast
boot like this so I'm not sure what problems you will run up against.
but maybe it's possible. but 200ms feels a bit to optimistic.


> However, handing CAN transmission control over to Linux is quite 
> complicated nowadays, since it would involve passing structures in 
> memory and hacking through device init.
> It'd be nice to have a framework with which u-boot could hand-over 
> devices to Linux in a clean and defined way.
not likely to happen as a generic solution. Much better to just remove
the boat loader then and work on optimizing the linux startup code. 

      reply	other threads:[~2009-10-13 12:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-10-12 11:07 Linux seamless booting Fortini Matteo
2009-10-12 13:23 ` Roberto Guerra
2009-10-12 13:54   ` Fortini Matteo
2009-10-13 12:22     ` Kenneth Johansson [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1255436545.4918.70.camel@kenjo-laptop \
    --to=kenneth@southpole.se \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=matteo.fortini@mta.it \
    --cc=roberto.j.guerra@gmail.com \
    --cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).