[U-Boot] [PATCH] zynq: Use arch_cpu_init() instead of lowlevel_init()

[Albert ARIBAUD <albert.u.boot@aribaud.net>]

Hi Michal,

On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:52:02 +0200, Michal Simek
<michal.simek@xilinx.com> wrote:

> Zynq lowlevel_init() was implemented in C but stack
> pointer is setup after function call in _main().
> Move architecture setup to arch_cpu_init() which is call
> as the first function in board_init_f() which
> already have correct stack pointer.
> 
> Reported-by: Sven Schwermer <sven.schwermer@tuhh.de>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>
> ---
> I can't see any problem to call zynq setup a little
> bit later. There is already expectation that u-boot
> runs from DDR.
> Moving lowlevel_init from C to ASM is possible but
> I will have to introduce new macros with hardcoded
> values. Using structures is much nicer.
> 
> ---
>  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/cpu.c | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/cpu.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/cpu.c
> index 4367d1a..8846f30 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/cpu.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/cpu.c
> @@ -11,6 +11,10 @@
> 
>  void lowlevel_init(void)
>  {
> +}

I'd rather you deleted lowlevel_init() as a C function with this
name should not exist.
 
> +int arch_cpu_init(void)
> +{
>  	zynq_slcr_unlock();
>  	/* remap DDR to zero, FILTERSTART */
>  	writel(0, &scu_base->filter_start);
> @@ -31,6 +35,8 @@ void lowlevel_init(void)
>  	writel(0xC, &slcr_base->ddr_urgent);
> 
>  	zynq_slcr_lock();
> +
> +	return 0;
>  }
> 
>  void reset_cpu(ulong addr)
> --
> 1.8.2.3

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.