On 09/17/2014 08:45 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 10:05:44PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
On 09/15/2014 09:41 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
The initialisation of the memory nodes on mvebu is a bit
compilcated:
pure_initcall(mvebu_memory_fixup_register)
of_register_fixup(mvebu_memory_of_fixup, NULL)
core_initcall(kirkwood_init_soc)
mvebu_set_memory()
core_initcall(of_arm_init)
of_fix_tree()
mvebu_memory_of_fixup()
First a mvebu common of_fixup function is registered, then the SoC
calls mvebu_set_memory which stores the memory base and size in global
variables. Afterwards the of_fixup is executed which fixes the memory
nodes according to the global variables.
Instead register a SoC specific fixup which directly calls mvebu_set_memory
with the memory base and size as arguments:
pure_initcall(kirkwood_register_soc_fixup);
of_register_fixup(kirkwood_init_soc, NULL);
core_initcall(of_arm_init)
of_fix_tree()
kirkwood_init_soc()
mvebu_set_memory(phys_base, phys_size);
Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hmm, this breaks Armada 370 and most likely also Armada XP. Actually,
it breaks any SoC that has a DTB with internal regs set to 0xd0000000.
---
arch/arm/mach-mvebu/armada-370-xp.c | 9 ++++++--
arch/arm/mach-mvebu/common.c | 34 ++++++++++---------------------
arch/arm/mach-mvebu/dove.c | 9 ++++++--
arch/arm/mach-mvebu/include/mach/common.h | 2 +-
arch/arm/mach-mvebu/kirkwood.c | 9 ++++++--
5 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/armada-370-xp.c b/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/armada-370-xp.c
index 6251100..5c8499b 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/armada-370-xp.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/armada-370-xp.c
@@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ static void __noreturn armada_370_xp_reset_cpu(unsigned long addr)
;
}
-static int armada_370_xp_init_soc(void)
+static int armada_370_xp_init_soc(struct device_node *root, void *context)
{
unsigned long phys_base, phys_size;
u32 reg;
@@ -74,4 +74,9 @@ static int armada_370_xp_init_soc(void)
Because armada_370_xp_init_soc() does
mvebu_mbus_add_range(0xf0, 0x01, MVEBU_REMAP_INT_REG_BASE);
right above, which will add the range(s) required for internal register
of_fixup. Since this patch moved armada_370_xp_init_soc to the
of_fixups, we don't fix this up for the initial DT tree.
return 0;
}
-core_initcall(armada_370_xp_init_soc);
+
+static int armada_370_register_soc_fixup(void)
+{
I guess moving mvebu_mbus_add_range() in here does not work, because
it will add the armada_370_xp range also for dove and kirkwood.
Do we need a separate of_fixup registered for fixing up the mbus? Can't
we just call mvebu_mbus_of_fixup() directly from mvebu_mbus_add_range()?
This won't be very efficient for dove which calls mvebu_mbus_add_range()
twice so it has to iterate over the device tree twice, but it should
work, right?
It is not the number of iterations I am concerned about. In a Multi-SoC
environment, we add ranges for MBUS_ID(0xf0, 0x01) three times anyway
plus Dove's MBUS_ID(0xf0, 0x02).
Currently, we are lucky that MBUS_ID(0xf0, 0x01) is the same for all
SoCs and MBUS_ID(0xf0, 0x02) is exclusive for Dove. If we cross our
fingers and hope it will never change, we can just do:
static int dove_register_soc_fixup(void)
{
mvebu_mbus_add_range(0xf0, 0x01, MVEBU_REMAP_INT_REG_BASE);
mvebu_mbus_add_range(0xf0, 0x02, DOVE_REMAP_MC_REGS);
return of_register_fixup(dove_init_soc, NULL);
}
pure_initcall(dove_register_soc_fixup);
and
static int armada_370_xp_register_soc_fixup(void)
{
mvebu_mbus_add_range(0xf0, 0x01, MVEBU_REMAP_INT_REG_BASE);
return of_register_fixup(armada_370_xp_init_soc, NULL);
}
pure_initcall(armada_370_xp_register_soc_fixup);
and the same for Kirkwood.
If we want to make it safe for any future SoC that might break the
MBUS_ID() assumptions above, we can add the machine_id compatible
to mvebu_mbus_add_range(), i.e.
static int armada_370_xp_register_soc_fixup(void)
{
mvebu_mbus_add_range("marvell,armada-370-xp", 0xf0, 0x01,
MVEBU_REMAP_INT_REG_BASE);
return of_register_fixup(armada_370_xp_init_soc, NULL);
}
pure_initcall(armada_370_xp_register_soc_fixup);
If you put your current series into some branch I can pull, I can
add the required patches later today.
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
