[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 11/11] S3C24XX: Add support to MINI2416 board

["José Miguel Gonçalves" <jose.goncalves@inov.pt>]

Hi Tom,

On 17-09-2012 16:11, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 03:47:46PM +0100, Jos? Miguel Gon?alves wrote:
>> On 17-09-2012 15:39, Tom Rini wrote:
>>> On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 10:11:07AM +0100, Jos? Miguel Gon?alves wrote:
>>>> On 09/14/2012 07:58 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 06:29:02PM +0100, Jos?? Miguel Gon??alves wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The MINI2416 board is based on a Samsung's S3C2416 SoC and has 64MB DDR2 SDRAM,
>>>>>> 256MB NAND Flash, a LAN9220 Ethernet Controller and a WM8731 Audio CODEC.
>>>>>> This U-Boot port was implemented and tested on a unit bought to Boardcon
>>>>>> (http://www.armdesigner.com/) but there are some other chinese providers
>>>>>> that can supply it with a selectable NAND chip from 128MB to 1GB.
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you please try this on top of my SPL framework series?  Thanks!
>>>> I thought I was using the latest SPL framework!
>>>> Can you please detail on what I should do different?
>>> Please see
>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/u-boot at lists.denx.de/msg92156.html
>>>
>> As this is still not merged, I reckon you only want to check if this
>> new SPL framework works fine with my board.
>>
>> I'm not expected to resubmit my patch to be according with the new framework, correct?
> v1 of your patches was posted well after the merge window for v2012.10
> closed.  My SPL series will be merged to mainline shortly (taking care
> of everyone elses merge requests first).  So yes, to get into v2013.01
> you will need to update.  If you check the archives you can see how the
> altera soc support changed to adapt to this framework.  And if there's a
> shortcoming in the framework, I really do want to know.  Thanks!
>

I already have my board working on the top of this new SPL framework.
It was easy to migrate and the interface is easier to use for a new U-Boot 
developer (like me). Good work!
I'll resubmit my new patch later on.

Here are my board's SPL sizes for both older and new frameworks:

text data bss dec hex filename
4083 8 588 4679 1247 u-boot/spl/u-boot-spl

text data bss dec hex filename
3905 160 500 4565 11d5 u-boot-spl-framework/spl/u-boot-spl

So I get around 30 bytes of additional IRAM space (text + data).

I have a comment, though. As you use memset() to initialize the .bss, wouldn?t be 
better that CONFIG_SPL_LIBGENERIC_SUPPORT would be automaticaly included when 
adding CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK to the board config?

Best regards,
Jos? Gon?alves