[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/6] nand: Add SPL_NAND support to mxc_nand_spl

Benoît Thébaudeau
2013-04-19T11:55:31Z

Dear Marek Vasut,

On Friday, April 19, 2013 1:14:16 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Beno?t Th?baudeau,
>
> > On Friday, April 19, 2013 10:38:48 AM, Beno?t Th?baudeau wrote:
> > > Dear Marek Vasut,
> > >
> > > On Friday, April 19, 2013 6:10:51 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > Add support for generic NAND SPL via the SPL framework into the
> > > > mxc_nand_spl driver. This is basically just a simple rename and
> > > > publication of the already implemented functions. To avoid the
> > > > old function which are used with the nand_spl/ stuff getting in
> > > > the way of NAND SPL framework, the macro CONFIG_SPL_NAND_LEGACY
> > > > was introduced and two remaining legacy boards were adjusted.
> > > > These board need to be either fixed or removed in the long run,
> > > > but I don't have either.
> > > >
> > > > Also make sure the requested payload is aligned to full pages,
> > > > otherwise this simple driver fails to load the last page.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
> > > > Cc: Albert ARIBAUD <albert.u.boot@aribaud.net>
> > > > Cc: Beno?t Th?baudeau <benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com>
> > > > Cc: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@freescale.com>
> > > > Cc: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
> > > > Cc: Stefano Babic <sbabic@denx.de>
> > > > Cc: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand_spl.c | 13 ++++++++++---
> > > > include/configs/mx31pdk.h | 1 +
> > > > include/configs/tx25.h | 1 +
> > > > 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand_spl.c
> > > > b/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand_spl.c
> > > > index 09f23c3..8ff03c9 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand_spl.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand_spl.c
> > > > @@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ static int is_badblock(int pagenumber)
> > > >
> > > > return 0;
> > > >
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > -static int nand_load(unsigned int from, unsigned int size, unsigned
> > > > char *buf)
> > > > +int nand_spl_load_image(uint32_t from, unsigned int size, void *buf)
> > > >
> > > > {
> > > >
> > > > int i;
> > > > unsigned int page;
> > > >
> > > > @@ -303,6 +303,7 @@ static int nand_load(unsigned int from, unsigned
> > > > int size, unsigned char *buf)
> > > >
> > > > page = from / CONFIG_SYS_NAND_PAGE_SIZE;
> > > > i = 0;
> > > >
> > > > + size = roundup(size, CONFIG_SYS_NAND_PAGE_SIZE);
> > > >
> > > > while (i < size / CONFIG_SYS_NAND_PAGE_SIZE) {
> > > >
> > > > if (nfc_read_page(page, buf) < 0)
> > > >
> > > > return -1;
> > > >
> > > > @@ -332,6 +333,7 @@ static int nand_load(unsigned int from, unsigned
> > > > int size, unsigned char *buf)
> > > >
> > > > return 0;
> > > >
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SPL_NAND_SUPPORT_LEGACY
> > > >
> > > > /*
> > > >
> > > > * The main entry for NAND booting. It's necessary that SDRAM is
> > > > already * configured and available since this code loads the main
> > > > U-Boot image
> > > >
> > > > @@ -345,8 +347,9 @@ void nand_boot(void)
> > > >
> > > > * CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_OFFS and CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_SIZE must
> > > > * be aligned to full pages
> > > > */
> > > >
> > > > - if (!nand_load(CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_OFFS,
> > > > CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_SIZE, - (uchar
> > > > *)CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_DST)) {
> > > > + if (!nand_spl_load_image(CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_OFFS,
> > > > + CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_SIZE,
> > > > + (uchar *)CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_DST)) {
> > > >
> > > > /* Copy from NAND successful, start U-boot */
> > > > uboot = (void *)CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_START;
> > > > uboot();
> > > >
> > > > @@ -364,3 +367,7 @@ void hang(void)
> > > >
> > > > /* Loop forever */
> > > > while (1) ;
> > > >
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > +#endif
> > > > +
> > > > +void nand_init(void) {}
> > > > +void nand_deselect(void) {}
> > > > diff --git a/include/configs/mx31pdk.h b/include/configs/mx31pdk.h
> > > > index 1754595..217552e 100644
> > > > --- a/include/configs/mx31pdk.h
> > > > +++ b/include/configs/mx31pdk.h
> > > > @@ -50,6 +50,7 @@
> > > >
> > > > #define CONFIG_SPL_LDSCRIPT "arch/$(ARCH)/cpu/u-boot-spl.lds"
> > > > #define CONFIG_SPL_MAX_SIZE 2048
> > > > #define CONFIG_SPL_NAND_SUPPORT
> > > >
> > > > +#define CONFIG_SPL_NAND_SUPPORT_LEGACY
> > > >
> > > > #define CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE 0x87dc0000
> > > > #define CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE 0x87e00000
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/include/configs/tx25.h b/include/configs/tx25.h
> > > > index e72f8f6..7c362d0 100644
> > > > --- a/include/configs/tx25.h
> > > > +++ b/include/configs/tx25.h
> > > > @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@
> > > >
> > > > #define CONFIG_SPL_LDSCRIPT "arch/$(ARCH)/cpu/u-boot-
> spl.lds"
> > > > #define CONFIG_SPL_MAX_SIZE 2048
> > > > #define CONFIG_SPL_NAND_SUPPORT
> > > >
> > > > +#define CONFIG_SPL_NAND_SUPPORT_LEGACY
> > > >
> > > > #define CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE 0x810c0000
> > > > #define CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE 0x81200000
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 1.7.11.7
> > >
> > > This is not about legacy vs. non-legacy. This is about basic vs. more
> > > featured
> > > SPL because of SPL size constraints. So what about dropping
> > > CONFIG_SPL_NAND_SUPPORT_LEGACY and testing for CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK
> > > definition
> > > instead?
>
> I was thinking about that, but the symbol is unrelated to NAND.

Well, it's CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK + CONFIG_SPL_NAND_SUPPORT that defines the other
implementation, and CONFIG_SPL_NAND_SUPPORT triggers the build of mxc_nand_spl.c
for SPL, so the common point is CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK.

> I still think
> it's either a matter of fixing for new SPL or removing those two boards. The
> nand_spl/ stuff shall be removed ASAP.

Removing those boards is not a solution.

Is it really about "new" SPL? The generic SPL is enabled by CONFIG_SPL, and
CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK is a sub-option. If the generic SPL rules imposed to use
the SPL framework functions, there would be no such sub-option. So it looks like
these boards are complying to the new SPL rules.

We could see if using CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK would still allow the SPL to fit in
2 kiB in order to drop this function, but if it does not fit, the new SPL rules
should still make it possible to have a solution for any board having SPL size
constraints.

> > Also, I don't see any nand_init() (called by spl_nand_load_image()) for
> > m53evk.
>
> What do you mean?

I mean that I don't identify the implementation of nand_init() used in the
context of the m53evk since the builds of drivers/mtd/nand/nand.c and
drivers/mtd/nand/nand_spl_simple.c do not seem to be enabled for this board, and
I don't see another definition.

Best regards,
Beno?t