From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Prabhakar Kushwaha Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 09:21:24 +0530 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] doc: Add documentation for mpc85xx debugger support In-Reply-To: <4F60F1D0.8060600@freescale.com> References: <1329296027-28471-1-git-send-email-prabhakar@freescale.com> <20120306143923.69215202D7D@gemini.denx.de> <071A08F2C6A57E4E94D980ECA553F874575244@039-SN1MPN1-005.039d.mgd.msft.net> <20120307062452.8B48D202C7F@gemini.denx.de> <4F572159.9020303@freescale.com> <20120307123047.6586D202C7F@gemini.denx.de> <4F5EF3BE.1040209@freescale.com> <4F606676.6070504@freescale.com> <4F60F1D0.8060600@freescale.com> Message-ID: <4F61673C.3020005@freescale.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi Scott, On Thursday 15 March 2012 01:00 AM, Scott Wood wrote: > On 03/14/2012 04:35 AM, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote: >> Hi Wolfgang, >> >> On Tuesday 13 March 2012 12:44 PM, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote: >>> Hi Wolfgang, >>> >>> On Wednesday 07 March 2012 06:00 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: >>>> Dear Prabhakar Kushwaha, >>>> >>>> In message<4F572159.9020303@freescale.com> you wrote: >>>>>> Also, what's the "V1_V2" ? Are there also other systems (say, e500 v3 >>>>>> cores), and are this not affected? We already have CONFIG_E500 and >>>>>> CONFIG_E500MC so CONFIG_E500_V1_V2 appears to belong to this group, >>>>>> but if I understand your intentions it does something completely >>>>>> unrelated. >>>>> V1_V2 is used because it applied to e500v1 and e500v2 not e500mc >>>>> processor. So CONFIG_E500MC cant be used. Also I cant use >>>>> CONFIG_E500 as >>>>> it refer the entire e500 family which includes e500mc. >>>> Hm... I am not sure if CONFIG_E500 was supposed to include >>>> CONFIG_E500MC; it's nowhere documented. Let's assume it is. >>>> >>>> What happens if you enable this code on a E500MC system? >>>> >>> Debug restrictions are not valid for e500mc system. >>> >>> At first sight it should not hurt e500mc execution (other than some >>> seemingly unnecessary steps). However i will check this point. >>> >> We tried by enabling CONFIG_E500_V2_V2 for E500MC with u-boot patches. >> It boots fine and debugging can be done. > Be sure to mention in comments that the hack is only really needed for > v1/v2. I will clearly mention in doc >> So, we can use CONFIG_E500 #define instead of CONFIG_E500_V2_V2 i.e. >> debugging will always be enabled. One have to define >> CONFIG_DEBUGGER_TEMP_TLB for debugging in AS1 ( Part of patch >> "powerpc/85xx:Update NOR code base to support debugger" ) > CONFIG_SYS_PPC_E500_DEBUG_TLB OK >> CONFIG_DEBUGGER_TEMP_TLB can also be used for placing code which can >> only be required during debugging (specially code of temporary TLB >> creation) > Is there something specific you had in mind, other than the use that is > already present in this patchset? There is no specific use case in my mind other than the patch-set. Actually, Wolfgang is having concern about code size increase because of "temporary TLB creation" in start.S for debugging. That's why i am planning to use this #define for "temporary TLB creation" --Prabhakar