From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Wolfgang Wegner <wolfgang@leila.ping.de>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 20:59:09 +0200
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] [RFC] memsize.c: adapt get_ram_size() for
	address spaces >32 bit
In-Reply-To: <1274983869-9173-1-git-send-email-wd@denx.de>
References: <1274983869-9173-1-git-send-email-wd@denx.de>
Message-ID: <20100527185909.GG31271@leila.ping.de>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Dear Wolfgang Denk,

as the systems I was working on always had far less memory, I can
not comment much on the extension you propose here, but as Timur
Tabi's comments seem to go in a direction which could lead to a
bigger overhaul/discussion, I would like to add 2C from my point
of view on coldfire...

- MCF53xx/MCF5445x both simply lock up if non-existent memory is
  accessed. So if the SDRAM controller is set up for a too big size
  of memory, get_ram_size() will fail. I assume this applies to
  most coldfire devices.
- How about systems/configurations using CONFIG_MONITOR_IS_IN_RAM?
  I could not see special precautions for this, but in case an address
  to be tested by accident is occupied by a part of get_ram_size()
  itself, the result would be ... interesting. ;-) Of course, this is
  a rare thing (both using CONFIG_MONITOR_IS_IN_RAM and the chance
  to have get_ram_size() at such a crucial location), but still I
  fear it might have an impact if get_ram_size() gets "mandatory".
- at least in the coldfire world, CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_SIZE is quite
  often used for cache setup in the assembly code. This contradicts
  changing/setting the SDRAM size at runtime...

(Please don't see this as a vote against using and promoting
get_ram_size() - I just see some problems that I am not aware of an
easy solution for.)

Best regards,
Wolfgang Wegner