[U-Boot] [PATCH V2 03/15] imx: mx6ul: Update imx registers head file

[Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>]

On Sunday, July 12, 2015 at 01:55:58 PM, Peng Fan wrote:
> Hi Marek,

Hi!

> On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 01:50:55PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >On Sunday, July 12, 2015 at 12:32:28 PM, Peng Fan wrote:
> >> Hi Marek,
> >> 
> >> On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 12:11:42AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >> >On Saturday, July 11, 2015 at 10:07:11 AM, Peng Fan wrote:
> >> >> 1. Update imx register base address for i.MX6UL.
> >> >> 2. Remove duplicated MXS_APBH/GPMI/BCH_BASE.
> >> >> 3. Remove #ifdef for register addresses that equal to
> >> >> 
> >> >>    "AIPS2_OFF_BASE_ADDR + 0x34000" for different chips.
> >> >> 
> >> >> 4. According fuse map, complete fuse_bank4_regs.
> >> >> 5. Move AIPS3_ARB_BASE_ADDR and AIPS3_ARB_END_ADDR out of #ifdef
> >> >> CONFIG_MX6SX, because we can use runtime check
> >> >> 
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <Peng.Fan@freescale.com>
> >> >> ---
> >> >
> >> >[...]
> >> >
> >> >> @@ -309,11 +311,16 @@
> >> >> 
> >> >>  #define PWM8_BASE_ADDR              (AIPS3_ARB_BASE_ADDR + 0xB0000)
> >> >>  #endif
> >> >> 
> >> >> +/* only for i.MX6SX/UL */
> >> >> +#define WDOG3_BASE_ADDR (is_cpu_type(MXC_CPU_MX6UL) ?		\
> >> >> +			 (AIPS2_OFF_BASE_ADDR + 0x64000) :	\
> >> >> +			 (AIPS3_ARB_BASE_ADDR + 0x88000))
> >> >> +
> >> >
> >> >This might not work if used in assembler.
> >> 
> >> I did not see any scenario that it will be used in assembler now.
> >
> >Does that mean we will be fine with adding code which we know might easily
> >break?
> 
> My bad.
> 
> >> If we truely need it in assembler, then we can not avoid so many
> >> "ifdef"s.
> >
> >errr ... ifdef __ASSEMBLY__ would suffice here I guess, but to be really
> >smart about it, I'd say you might want to define something like
> >MX6UL_WDOG3_BASE, MX6S_WDOG3_BASE and then define WDOG3_BASE_ADDR as
> >(is_cpu_type(...) ? MX6UL_WDOG3_BASE : MX6S.... ) . Then you could access
> >the WDOG3 from assembler and from C code with the benefit that from C
> >code, you'd be able to access it in a bit smoother way. I don't know if
> >there's a way to do it easily in asm too, sorry.
> 
> Good suggestion. Later, will try to use this way in v3, after waiting
> for more comments in the whole patch set.

Thanks !

Best regards,
Marek Vasut