From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lokesh Vutla Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:28:58 +0530 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 4/8] arm: K3: am654: Add support for boot device detection In-Reply-To: <20180824141105.GM26633@bill-the-cat> References: <20180821143055.29012-1-lokeshvutla@ti.com> <20180821143055.29012-5-lokeshvutla@ti.com> <20180824141105.GM26633@bill-the-cat> Message-ID: <236157fe-90a3-7fb7-de6c-13d21403958f@ti.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Friday 24 August 2018 07:41 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 08:00:51PM +0530, Lokesh Vutla wrote: > >> AM654 allows for booting from primary or backup boot media. >> Both media can be chosen individually based on switch settings. >> ROM looks for a valid image in primary boot media, if not found >> then looks in backup boot media. In order to pass this boot media >> information to boot loader, ROM stores a value at a particular >> address. Add support for reading this information and determining >> the boot media correctly. > [snip] >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-k3/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-k3/Kconfig >> index c532fbd061..117e5b4e4a 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-k3/Kconfig >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-k3/Kconfig >> @@ -40,4 +40,11 @@ config MCU_SCRATCHPAD_SIZE >> help >> Describes the size of MCU Scratchpad RAM. >> >> +config BOOT_PARAM_TABLE_INDEX >> + hex "Address of Array Index to be used within BOOT_PARAM_TABLE" >> + default 0x41c7fbfc if SOC_K3_AM6 >> + help >> + Address at which ROM stores the value which determines if SPL >> + is booted up by primary boot media or secondary boot media. >> + > > I'm not sure this belongs in Kconfig. This isn't configurable really is > it? Agreed. Will drop the prompt string in v2. > >> +static u32 __get_backup_bootmedia(u32 devstat) >> { >> + u32 bkup_boot = (devstat & CTRLMMR_MAIN_DEVSTAT_BKUP_BOOTMODE_MASK) >> >> + CTRLMMR_MAIN_DEVSTAT_BKUP_BOOTMODE_SHIFT; >> + >> + switch (bkup_boot) { >> +#define __BKUP_BOOT_DEVICE(n) \ >> + case BACKUP_BOOT_DEVICE_##n: \ >> + return BOOT_DEVICE_##n; > > I really don't like defining the macro in the function like this. And > in terms of style, I think I'd rather see it spelled out with > case/return as is normally done. Sure. Will fix it in v2. Thanks and regards, Lokesh >