05.09.2013, в 16:49, John David Anglin <dave.anglin@xxxxxxxx> написал(а):
> On 5-Sep-13, at 5:23 AM, Alex Ivanov wrote:
>
>
>> Good find! I though that it would be worth to check the load somehow,
>> as well. I've added the following piece after the load:
>>
>> WREG32(RADEON_CP_ME_RAM_RADDR, 0);
>> for (i = 0; i < size; i += 2)
>> if (RREG32(RADEON_CP_ME_RAM_DATAH)
>> != be32_to_cpup(&fw_data[i]) ||
>> RREG32(RADEON_CP_ME_RAM_DATAL)
>> != be32_to_cpup(&fw_data[i+1])) {
>> printk(KERN_WARNING "RADEON_CP_ME_RAM_DATAH "
>> "MISMATCH!\n");
>> break;
>> }
>>
>> I've recompiled with this and booted to the new kernel, but seeing no warning,
>> so it looks like it passes.
>
> Could you add a line of code just to be sure the check is executed?
>
> From the boot log, it looks like register accesses generally seem to work, so it's
> starting to look like the card doesn't like the firmware.
Looks like.
>
> About all that I can see in the above that might be a problem is be32_to_cpup.
> Maybe you could just print in hex what you read back? The R100 file is quite
> small.
>
>>
>> What's strange though is why they write zero instead of concrete memory address
>> to the CP_ME_RAM_ADDR register...
>
> Do you think the initial value should be different? The documentation states the register
> is auto incremented on reads and writes.
My bad. I didn't take the written in manual correctly during first reading.
>
> Dave
> --
> John David Anglin dave.anglin@xxxxxxxx
I've added hex printing in a check and at brief view the output seems to match cp firmware.
In my case, it's a r420_cp.bin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
