From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 09:42:33 -0700 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] bcm2836 SoC support (used in Raspberry Pi 2 model B) In-Reply-To: <20150210171404.E284.AA925319@jp.panasonic.com> References: <1423551406-22470-1-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org> <1423551406-22470-2-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org> <20150210171404.E284.AA925319@jp.panasonic.com> Message-ID: <54DA34F9.3020205@wwwdotorg.org> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 02/10/2015 01:14 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 23:56:45 -0700 > Stephen Warren wrote: > >> The bcm2835 and bcm2836 are essentially identical, except: >> - The CPU is an ARM1176 v.s. a quad-core Cortex-A7. >> - The physical address of many IO controllers has moved. >> >> Rather than introducing a whole new bcm2836 value for $(SOC) or $(ARCH), >> update the existing bcm2835 code to handle the minor differences, and >> plumb it into the ARMv7 CPU architecture. >> > [ snip ] > >> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/bcm2835/Makefile b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/bcm2835/Makefile >> new file mode 100644 >> index 000000000000..ed1ee4753d49 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/bcm2835/Makefile >> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ >> +# >> +# (C) Copyright 2012 Stephen Warren >> +# >> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ >> +# >> + >> +src_dir := ../../arm1176/bcm2835/ >> + >> +obj-y := >> +obj-y += $(src_dir)/init.o >> +obj-y += $(src_dir)/reset.o >> +obj-y += $(src_dir)/timer.o >> +obj-y += $(src_dir)/mbox.o > > > Tom, > > Here is another proof that the arch/$(ARCH)/cpu/$(CPU)/$(SOC) structure is wrong. > BCM2836 crib most of the source files from BCM2835 > but they must be placed separetely because of the difference of the main processor. > > Could you tell me your impression about my RFC series? > (Anyway, it is already out-dated. I can rebase if you like.) FWIW, I did wonder about basing my patches on top of your directory re-org. However, since it was (IIRC) an RFC, I shied away from that for now. > Of course, we can merge arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/bcm2835 and arch/arm/cpu/armv7/bcm2836 > into arch/arm/mach-bcm lator. mach-bcm2835 or mach-bcm283x would likely be better than mach-bcm, since there are various other lines of Broadcom SoCs (some already supported in U-Boot), and I have no particular reason to believe they share design with the bcm2835/6.