* [U-Boot] [Patch v2] fsl-layerscape: fdt: add IFC fixup if no IFC is avaliable in U-Boot
@ 2016-04-28 6:04 Gong Qianyu
2016-04-30 12:27 ` Mingkai Hu
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gong Qianyu @ 2016-04-28 6:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
IFC is considered as a required component in Layerscape platforms' Linux.
But if IFC is not enabled in U-Boot on some boards, accessing IFC memory
space would cause kernel call trace. So disable IFC node in such cases.
Signed-off-by: Gong Qianyu <Qianyu.Gong@nxp.com>
---
V2:
- Revised the title and message.
- Used #ifndef CONFIG_FSL_IFC rather than #ifdef CONFIG_FSL_QSPI.
arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c
index 1e875c4..96dab56 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c
@@ -98,4 +98,9 @@ void ft_cpu_setup(void *blob, bd_t *bd)
#ifdef CONFIG_SYS_DPAA_FMAN
fdt_fixup_fman_firmware(blob);
#endif
+
+#ifndef CONFIG_FSL_IFC
+ do_fixup_by_compat(blob, "fsl,ifc",
+ "status", "disabled", 8 + 1, 1);
+#endif
}
--
2.1.0.27.g96db324
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [U-Boot] [Patch v2] fsl-layerscape: fdt: add IFC fixup if no IFC is avaliable in U-Boot
2016-04-28 6:04 [U-Boot] [Patch v2] fsl-layerscape: fdt: add IFC fixup if no IFC is avaliable in U-Boot Gong Qianyu
@ 2016-04-30 12:27 ` Mingkai Hu
2016-05-03 4:32 ` Scott Wood
2016-05-16 16:47 ` York Sun
2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mingkai Hu @ 2016-04-30 12:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gong Qianyu [mailto:Qianyu.Gong at nxp.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 2:05 PM
> To: u-boot at lists.denx.de; york sun; oss at buserror.net
> Cc: Mingkai Hu; Qianyu Gong
> Subject: [Patch v2] fsl-layerscape: fdt: add IFC fixup if no IFC is avaliable in
> U-Boot
>
> IFC is considered as a required component in Layerscape platforms' Linux.
> But if IFC is not enabled in U-Boot on some boards, accessing IFC memory space
> would cause kernel call trace. So disable IFC node in such cases.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gong Qianyu <Qianyu.Gong@nxp.com>
> ---
> V2:
> - Revised the title and message.
> - Used #ifndef CONFIG_FSL_IFC rather than #ifdef CONFIG_FSL_QSPI.
>
> arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-
> layerscape/fdt.c
> index 1e875c4..96dab56 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c
> @@ -98,4 +98,9 @@ void ft_cpu_setup(void *blob, bd_t *bd) #ifdef
> CONFIG_SYS_DPAA_FMAN
> fdt_fixup_fman_firmware(blob);
> #endif
> +
> +#ifndef CONFIG_FSL_IFC
> + do_fixup_by_compat(blob, "fsl,ifc",
> + "status", "disabled", 8 + 1, 1);
> +#endif
> }
Reviewed-by: Mingkai Hu <mingkai.hu@nxp.com>
Regards,
Mingkai
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [Patch v2] fsl-layerscape: fdt: add IFC fixup if no IFC is avaliable in U-Boot
2016-04-28 6:04 [U-Boot] [Patch v2] fsl-layerscape: fdt: add IFC fixup if no IFC is avaliable in U-Boot Gong Qianyu
2016-04-30 12:27 ` Mingkai Hu
@ 2016-05-03 4:32 ` Scott Wood
2016-05-03 6:23 ` Calvin Johnson
2016-05-16 16:47 ` York Sun
2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Scott Wood @ 2016-05-03 4:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
On Thu, 2016-04-28 at 14:04 +0800, Gong Qianyu wrote:
> IFC is considered as a required component in Layerscape platforms' Linux.
What does this mean?
> But if IFC is not enabled in U-Boot on some boards, accessing IFC memory
> space would cause kernel call trace. So disable IFC node in such cases.
That's the symptom, not the problem. The problem is that the kernel is
assuming that U-Boot has done certain initialization, such as the chipselect
registers, and clearing SRAM (though Linux really should be doing the latter).
Why is U-Boot being configured without this?
-Scott
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [Patch v2] fsl-layerscape: fdt: add IFC fixup if no IFC is avaliable in U-Boot
2016-05-03 4:32 ` Scott Wood
@ 2016-05-03 6:23 ` Calvin Johnson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Calvin Johnson @ 2016-05-03 6:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
> -----Original Message-----
> From: U-Boot [mailto:u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Scott Wood
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2016 10:02 AM
> To: Qianyu Gong <qianyu.gong@nxp.com>; u-boot at lists.denx.de; york sun
> <york.sun@nxp.com>
> Cc: Mingkai Hu <mingkai.hu@nxp.com>
> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [Patch v2] fsl-layerscape: fdt: add IFC fixup if no IFC is
> avaliable in U-Boot
>
> On Thu, 2016-04-28 at 14:04 +0800, Gong Qianyu wrote:
> > IFC is considered as a required component in Layerscape platforms' Linux.
>
I don't think IFC is considered as a required component on all SoCs. The LS1012A does not have IFC.
> What does this mean?
>
> > But if IFC is not enabled in U-Boot on some boards, accessing IFC
> > memory space would cause kernel call trace. So disable IFC node in such
> cases.
>
> That's the symptom, not the problem. The problem is that the kernel is
> assuming that U-Boot has done certain initialization, such as the chipselect
> registers, and clearing SRAM (though Linux really should be doing the latter).
> Why is U-Boot being configured without this?
>
> -Scott
>
> _______________________________________________
> U-Boot mailing list
> U-Boot at lists.denx.de
> http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Calvin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [Patch v2] fsl-layerscape: fdt: add IFC fixup if no IFC is avaliable in U-Boot
2016-04-28 6:04 [U-Boot] [Patch v2] fsl-layerscape: fdt: add IFC fixup if no IFC is avaliable in U-Boot Gong Qianyu
2016-04-30 12:27 ` Mingkai Hu
2016-05-03 4:32 ` Scott Wood
@ 2016-05-16 16:47 ` York Sun
2016-05-17 3:47 ` Qianyu Gong
2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: York Sun @ 2016-05-16 16:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
On 04/27/2016 11:19 PM, Gong Qianyu wrote:
> IFC is considered as a required component in Layerscape platforms' Linux.
> But if IFC is not enabled in U-Boot on some boards, accessing IFC memory
> space would cause kernel call trace. So disable IFC node in such cases.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gong Qianyu <Qianyu.Gong@nxp.com>
> ---
> V2:
> - Revised the title and message.
> - Used #ifndef CONFIG_FSL_IFC rather than #ifdef CONFIG_FSL_QSPI.
>
> arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c
> index 1e875c4..96dab56 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c
> @@ -98,4 +98,9 @@ void ft_cpu_setup(void *blob, bd_t *bd)
> #ifdef CONFIG_SYS_DPAA_FMAN
> fdt_fixup_fman_firmware(blob);
> #endif
> +
> +#ifndef CONFIG_FSL_IFC
> + do_fixup_by_compat(blob, "fsl,ifc",
> + "status", "disabled", 8 + 1, 1);
> +#endif
> }
>
Qianyu,
For the platforms you are testing, is IFC disabled/enabled at SoC level (eg.
RCW) or board level (eg. FPGA)? Can you detect if IFC is enabled by checking
registers?
York
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [Patch v2] fsl-layerscape: fdt: add IFC fixup if no IFC is avaliable in U-Boot
2016-05-16 16:47 ` York Sun
@ 2016-05-17 3:47 ` Qianyu Gong
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Qianyu Gong @ 2016-05-17 3:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Hi York,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: York Sun [mailto:york.sun at nxp.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 12:47 AM
> To: Qianyu Gong <qianyu.gong@nxp.com>; u-boot at lists.denx.de;
> oss at buserror.net
> Cc: Mingkai Hu <mingkai.hu@nxp.com>
> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] fsl-layerscape: fdt: add IFC fixup if no IFC is avaliable in U-
> Boot
>
> On 04/27/2016 11:19 PM, Gong Qianyu wrote:
> > IFC is considered as a required component in Layerscape platforms' Linux.
> > But if IFC is not enabled in U-Boot on some boards, accessing IFC
> > memory space would cause kernel call trace. So disable IFC node in such cases.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Gong Qianyu <Qianyu.Gong@nxp.com>
> > ---
> > V2:
> > - Revised the title and message.
> > - Used #ifndef CONFIG_FSL_IFC rather than #ifdef CONFIG_FSL_QSPI.
> >
> > arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c | 5 +++++
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c
> > b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c
> > index 1e875c4..96dab56 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c
> > @@ -98,4 +98,9 @@ void ft_cpu_setup(void *blob, bd_t *bd) #ifdef
> > CONFIG_SYS_DPAA_FMAN
> > fdt_fixup_fman_firmware(blob);
> > #endif
> > +
> > +#ifndef CONFIG_FSL_IFC
> > + do_fixup_by_compat(blob, "fsl,ifc",
> > + "status", "disabled", 8 + 1, 1); #endif
> > }
> >
>
> Qianyu,
>
> For the platforms you are testing, is IFC disabled/enabled at SoC level (eg.
> RCW) or board level (eg. FPGA)? Can you detect if IFC is enabled by checking
> registers?
>
> York
For LS1043AQDS, IFC is disabled at board level(at SoC level, only IFC NOR is disabled).
Yes, I can detect if IFC is enabled by checking QIXIS registers.
Regards,
Qianyu
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-05-17 3:47 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-04-28 6:04 [U-Boot] [Patch v2] fsl-layerscape: fdt: add IFC fixup if no IFC is avaliable in U-Boot Gong Qianyu
2016-04-30 12:27 ` Mingkai Hu
2016-05-03 4:32 ` Scott Wood
2016-05-03 6:23 ` Calvin Johnson
2016-05-16 16:47 ` York Sun
2016-05-17 3:47 ` Qianyu Gong
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox