[U-Boot] [PATCH RESEND 0/7] spi: cadence_qspi: optimize & fix indirect rd-writes

[Graham Moore <grmoore@opensource.altera.com>]

On 07/02/2015 12:50 PM, Vikas MANOCHA wrote:
> Hi Graham,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Graham Moore [mailto:grmoore at opensource.altera.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 7:37 AM
>> To: Vikas MANOCHA
>> Cc: Stefan Roese; u-boot at lists.denx.de; dinguyen at opensource.altera.com;
>> jteki at openedev.com
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/7] spi: cadence_qspi: optimize & fix indirect
>> rd-writes
>>
>> On 06/22/2015 06:31 PM, Vikas MANOCHA wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>>>> The point is if after applying above mentioned patch (...: fix
>>>>> indirect read/write start address), Read/write are working fine,
>>>>> then trigger_base value of 0xFFA00_0000 should also work fine.
>>>>> Can you please modify the trigger_base value from 0x0 to 0xFFA0_0000
>>>>> in Socfpga.dtsi & check.
>>>>> If it works, it would mean both (socfpga & stv0991) are behaving same.
>>>>
>>>> No. With this change, the "sf read" command crashes / hangs on the
>>>> SoCFPGA board.
>>>
>>> Ok, I don't know why socfpga is not working with trigger_base to be
>> 0xFFA0_0000.
>>> Normally it should work, Graham also thinks the same, Let's wait for his
>> discussion with the Altera designers.
>>>
>>
>> Wait a minute, on SoCFPGA, the flashbase is 0xffa00000, and the trigger base
>> is 0x00000000.  The point of having a different address was that they needed
>> to be different on SoCFPGA, right?
>>
>> As for why they're different, the Altera Cyclone5 SoCFPGA has a complex
>> multilevel interconnect where the QSPI is three levels down, and is the only
>> slave of an AHB master.  At that level of the interconnect, the base address
>> has long been stripped off, it was used to select down to the final master.
>> The QSPI is the only thing on that AHB bus, so its address is zero.  Or at least
>> that's how I understand it.
>
> If we check the code for reading/writing to the FIFO/SRAM of the controller, complete base address is being used.
> Which means CPU is using address 0xFFA0_0000, so does not seems like base address is stripped off. It is only for the trigger address which needs programming to  0x0 ?
>
> Regardless, it is something specific to socfpga architecture & should not be part of cadence qspi driver.
>

I'm sorry, I don't understand your comment.  What is 'it' that should 
not be part of the cadence qspi driver?

-Graham

> Rgds,
> Vikas
>
>>
>> -Graham