From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 09:04:14 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: socfpga: reset: FIX address of tstscratch
	register
In-Reply-To: <56459923.6000105@linutronix.de>
References: <1447348990-2948-1-git-send-email-ilu@linutronix.de>
 <201511130813.43082.marex@denx.de> <56459923.6000105@linutronix.de>
Message-ID: <201511130904.14123.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 Friday, November 13, 2015 at 09:02:43 AM, Philipp Rosenberger wrote:
> Hi Marek,
> 
> On 13.11.2015 08:13, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On Friday, November 13, 2015 at 07:11:18 AM, Stefan Roese wrote:
> >> Hi Philipp,
> >> 
> >> On 12.11.2015 18:23, Philipp Rosenberger wrote:
> >>> The Cyclone V Hard Processor System Technical Reference Manual in the
> >>> chapter about the Reset Manager Module Address Map stats that the
> >>> offset of the tstscratch register ist 0x54 not 0x24.
> >>> 
> >>> Cyclone V Hard Processor System Technical Reference Manual cv_5v4
> >>> 2015.11.02 page 3-17 Reset Manager Module Address Map
> >>> 
> >>> Signed-off-by: Philipp Rosenberger <ilu@linutronix.de>
> >>> ---
> >>> 
> >>>   arch/arm/mach-socfpga/include/mach/reset_manager.h | 1 +
> >>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >>> 
> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-socfpga/include/mach/reset_manager.h
> >>> b/arch/arm/mach-socfpga/include/mach/reset_manager.h index
> >>> 8e59578..6eb6011 100644
> >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-socfpga/include/mach/reset_manager.h
> >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-socfpga/include/mach/reset_manager.h
> >>> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ struct socfpga_reset_manager {
> >>> 
> >>>   	u32	per2_mod_reset;
> >>>   	u32	brg_mod_reset;
> >>>   	u32	misc_mod_reset;
> >>> 
> >>> +	u32	padding2[12];
> >>> 
> >>>   	u32	tstscratch;
> >>>   
> >>>   };
> >> 
> >> Thanks. But usually such padding things are added as "u8" (1 byte)
> >> variables. This makes it easier to calculate the offsets. In this
> >> case:
> >> 
> >> +	u8	padding2[0x30];
> >> 
> >> which I would prefer.
> > 
> > I don't mind either way, I can amend the patch (if you don't mind),
> > so let's hear Dinh's final word.
> 
> If we use u8 in the place we should change the padding1 in the same
> struct as well.

In that case, we keep it as-is . Subsequent patch is welcome if anyone cares.

Best regards,
Marek Vasut