From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2015 14:34:16 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCHv1 13/22] arm: socfpga: spl: Add s_init
In-Reply-To: <54D3DDCB.9010602@opensource.altera.com>
References: <1421253662-27222-1-git-send-email-dinguyen@opensource.altera.com>
 <201501150054.08701.marex@denx.de> <54D3DDCB.9010602@opensource.altera.com>
Message-ID: <201502071434.16275.marex@denx.de>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On Thursday, February 05, 2015 at 10:16:59 PM, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
> On 01/14/2015 05:54 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:

[...]

> >> +	/*
> >> +	 * Private components security
> >> +	 * U-Boot : configure private timer, global timer and cpu
> >> +	 * component access as non secure for kernel stage (as required
> >> +	 * by kernel)
> >> +	 */
> >> +	setbits_le32(SOCFPGA_SCU_SNSAC, 0xfff);
> > 
> > We do this in socfpga/misc.c in arch_early_init_r() already. You should
> > consolidate this code so we don't have it twice I think.
> 
> Yes, this can be removed.

Hi! Please use whichever place you think is better.

> >> +
> >> +#endif	/* CONFIG_SPL_BUILD */
> >> +
> >> +	/* Configure the L2 controller to make SDRAM start at 0	*/
> >> +	writel(0x1, (SOCFPGA_MPUL2_ADDRESS + SOCFPGA_MPUL2_ADRFLTR_START));
> > 
> > This as well.
> 
> This call has to stay because we want to map the SDRAM to 0x0 in the
> SPL. The call in arch_early_init_r() is in u-boot, and thus is too late.

Roger, but please remove the other invocation once the SPL is in place. OK?

[...]

> >> +/*
> >> + * SCU Non-secure Access Control
> >> + */
> >> +#define SOCFPGA_SCU_SNSAC	(SOCFPGA_MPUSCU_ADDRESS + 0x54)
> >> +/*
> >> + * L2 PL-310
> >> + * for configuring L2 address filtering start address in assembly.
> >> + */
> >> +#define SOCFPGA_MPUL2_ADRFLTR_START			(0xC00)
> > 
> > I think this is not needed if you use the code from misc.c , since these
> > registers are already defined there.
> 
> Yes, I can remove this and use the mappings already defined.

Please do :)

Thank you!