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

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

Hi Michal,

On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:19:52 +0200, Michal Simek <monstr@monstr.eu>
wrote:

> On 09/23/2013 02:31 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> Ok. Do you want me to create almost empty low_level.S or just use
> arch/arm/cpu/arvm7/lowlevel_init.S and define empty s_init()?

Urgh. I realize removing the C function would give you more work than
simply keeping it empty until the whole s_init() mess is cleaned up. :(

I'll take your change as-is, sorry for the noise.

> Thanks,
> Michal

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.