From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dirk Behme Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 07:30:18 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2] mx31: Setup AIPS registers In-Reply-To: References: <1330544699-21814-1-git-send-email-festevam@gmail.com> <4F4E847B.9000406@googlemail.com> Message-ID: <4F4F177A.7050005@de.bosch.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 29.02.2012 21:56, Fabio Estevam wrote: > On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Dirk Behme wrote: > >> Hmm, sorry if I missed anything because it's too late here. But: >> >> Why now an U-Boot patch? What's about the kernel patch you sent earlier? >> >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg162109.html > > The motivation for this patch came after I was debugging audio > playback on mx31pdk. > > I noticed that audio only worked when I used Redboot. > > Comparing the sources of Redboot and U-boot I saw that the aips > registers were not set. > > Setting them in U-boot allowed me to get audio playback working. > > Why did I send the aips setting to the kernel? Well, it is not always > possible for customers to change the bootloader. > > In case the bootloader does not set aips, then this should be done in > the kernel. > > You can also think on the possibility of someone using the mainline > U-boot with a kernel that does not set aips, so the safest thing is to > have such settings in the bootloader and in the kernel. Ah, thanks for the explanation! :) This does mean that you want the change in both, U-Boot and kernel, correct? >> And why don't you try to create some common parts with >> >> http://git.denx.de/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=u-boot.git;a=commitdiff;h=f2f7745825ee5f6bae5b480c8e9c6641a7ffa73b > > I thought about that, but I realized the AIPS settings were not > exactly the same. My main goal at this point was to get the aips > settings in mx31, but I can work on factoring out this code later. Yes, we definitely should look at which parts are common. I haven't looked at the details, but at least the register definitions [1] are the same? Best regards Dirk [1] +/* AIPS registers */ +struct aipstz_regs { + u32 mprot0; + u32 mprot1; + u32 rsvd[0xe]; + u32 opacr0; + u32 opacr1; + u32 opacr2; + u32 opacr3; + u32 opacr4; +}; +