[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] mxs: generalize code for print_cpuinfo()

[Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>]

Dear Stefano Babic,

> On 17/06/2012 14:58, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > The information now is gathered from HW_DIGCTL_CHIPID register and
> > includes the revision of the chip on the output.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>
> > Cc: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
> > Cc: Stefano Babic <sbabic@denx.de>
> > Cc: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@freescale.com>
> > ---
> 
> Hi Otavio,
> 
> >  arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mx28/mx28.c |   29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >  1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mx28/mx28.c
> > b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mx28/mx28.c index a82ff25..ac2f2e0 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mx28/mx28.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mx28/mx28.c
> > @@ -190,13 +190,38 @@ int arch_cpu_init(void)
> > 
> >  #endif
> >  
> >  #if defined(CONFIG_DISPLAY_CPUINFO)
> > 
> > +static const char *get_cpu_type(void)
> > +{
> > +	struct mx28_digctl_regs *digctl_regs =
> > +		(struct mx28_digctl_regs *)MXS_DIGCTL_BASE;
> > +
> > +	switch (readl(&digctl_regs->hw_digctl_chipid) >> 16) {
> > +	case 0x2800:
> > +		return "28";
> > +	case 0x3728:
> > +		return "23";
> > +	default:
> > +		return "<unidentified>";
> > +	}
> > +}
> 
> I like that there will be support for i.MX23, too. But I dislike that
> everything takes the name "MX28". As you suggest in your subject, maybe
> it is time to rename directories, and use "mxs" (as in kernel) instead
> of mx28.

We can do that eventually, later ... it depends on the ordering of Otavio's 
patches, I'm fine either way.

> > +
> > +static u8 get_cpu_rev(void)
> > +{
> > +	struct mx28_digctl_regs *digctl_regs =
> > +		(struct mx28_digctl_regs *)MXS_DIGCTL_BASE;
> > +
> > +	return readl(&digctl_regs->hw_digctl_chipid) & 0x0000F;
> > +}
> 
> Everywhere (i.MX, omap, ...) get_cpu_rev returns u32. The function is
> currently exported, too.

Correct, but isn't the return value mangled somehow (like having major rev. << 
16 and minor rev. << 0 )? Or that's only IMX?

> 
> Best regards,
> Stefano Babic

Best regards,
Marek Vasut