[U-Boot] [PATCH v2] arm: cm4008, cm41xx: set gd->ram_size in dram_init

Albert ARIBAUD
2012-07-09T21:58:51Z

Hi Andreas,

On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 12:25:00 +0200, "Andreas Bie?mann" <andreas.devel@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Dear Yann Vernier,
>
> On 06.07.2012 11:14, Yann Vernier wrote:
> > On Friday 06 July 2012 10:43:40 you wrote:
> >>>>> =((CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE+CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_SIZE-0x10000)<<(22-16) | \ +
> >>>>> (CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE>>(16-12) | 0x00e))
> >>>>
> >>>> ugh ... magic. Will it work for every possible setting?
> >>>> How about one setting CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE != 0x0? I the base address
> >>>> related to register content in any way?
> >>>
> >>> It's not a guarded secret, although it is far from obvious where to find
> >>> it. One way is micrel.com - Products - Ethernet ICs / ARM based SOC's -
> >>> HW Design Kit. Within that zip file,
> >>> KS8695X_EVAL_HW_RV4.0_DP/RegDescription/KS8695X Register Description
> >>> v1.1.pdf
> >>
> >> With this information I understand your equation. I think you should not
> >> do it that way. You may solve the current state (all devices have 8
> >> column, 4 bank and 32 bit). But one adding (well, if that will ever come
> >> ;) another board with different setting will get in trouble here and
> >> need to find another solution. Maybe more sophisticated by doing another
> >> equation.
> >>
> >> I think a straight forward solution here would be to add another special
> >> define in the board config, write the magic number down there and maybe
> >> describe what the number stands for. You can then just use the
> >> previously defined value in start.S.
> >> You may have a look for at91 lowlevel_init, there it is done that way.
> >
> > I shall. In fact, I may already have this problem as I need to verify the
> > timing on the flash memory (I have the demo board, not a cm4xxx), and the
> > reason I work on this is that we may design another board soon.
> >
> > I'm a little hesitant about how to fit these changes together, though; for now
> > I have three barely separated patches, but overhauling all those magic numbers
> > changes them all yet again. These three patches are all necessary to make my
> > u-boot work in the first place, while fixing the magic values is a code cleanup
> > change - probably editing arch/arm/include/asm/arch-ks8695/platform.h which
> > currently contains a few meaningless constants like KS8695_SDRAM_START and a
> > consistent misspelling of definitions.
> >
> > Could I save the value decoding and corresponding configuration changes for a
> > fourth patch?
>
> I'm fine with this suggestion.
> So the next question is who would pull it in mainline? Since this is arm
> related I guess Albert is the one in question.

Ah, board-related patches. :)

> I think these three patches are all fixes to get a board already in
> mainline working. So I think we should try to get these in -rc1.
> Albert, can you please comment?

If the cm4008/cm41xx board maintainer (as per MAINTAINERS, this is Greg Ungerer,
Cc:) green-lights it, then I'm ok for pulling it in.

> Best regards
>
> Andreas Bie?mann

Amicalement,
--
Albert.