[U-Boot] [PATCH v3 2/5] arm bootm: Do not append zero ATAG_MEM

Marek Vasut
2012-10-14T01:08:20Z

Dear Pali Roh?r,

> On Sunday 14 October 2012 02:27:05 Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Pali Roh?r,
> >
> > > On Sunday 14 October 2012 02:17:01 Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > Dear Pali Roh?r,
> > > >
> > > > > On Sunday 14 October 2012 01:45:06 Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > > > > for (i = 0; i < CONFIG_NR_DRAM_BANKS; i++) {
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > + if (bd->bi_dram[i].size == 0)
> > > > > > > + continue;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This doesn't look right at all, your board is
> > > > > > misconfigured
> > > > > > if
> > > > > > bd->bi_dram[i] == 0. Did you misconfigure
> > > > > > CONFIG_NR_DRAM_BANKS
> > > > > > ?
> > > > >
> > > > > On some N900 devices there are two banks and on some only
> > > > > one. If there is only one it has size 256 MB and if there
> > > > > are two both has 128 MB. CONFIG_NR_DRAM_BANKS must be
> > > > > specified at compile time, but for N900 I need runtime
> > > > > detection.
> > > >
> > > > How can that be? Are these two banks contiguous?
> > >
> > > Yes.
> >
> > And how does the memory map differ in case of device with one
> > 256MB block then ?
>
> Memory map is same, from 0x80000000 to 0x90000000.
>
> For two bank devices uboot reports:
> size=08000000 start=80000000
> size=08000000 start=88000000
>
> And for one:
> size=10000000 start=80000000
> size=00000000 start=90000000

Tom, can this not be handled as a single area? How does the omap memory layout
look?

Best regards,
Marek Vasut