On Rockchip boards the ROM loads the barebox binary to the start of DRAM where
later the TF-A is placed, so the first thing all 64bit Rockchip boards do is
to move away from that location. This is done with MMU disabled, so takes some
time. Instead of letting each board repeat this pattern, do the move in atf.c
at a place common for all Rockchip boards and turn on the MMU beforehand.

Also, both TF-A and OP-TEE hold the device tree passed to them in uncached 
memory,
so accessing it is slow. calling fdt_pack() on the device tree before passing
it squeezes the unused bytes out of the device tree and thus speed up TF-A
and OP-TEE by a few 100ms.

Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <[email protected]>
---
Sascha Hauer (3):
      ARM: rockchip: move to the load address with the MMU enabled
      ARM: rockchip: boards: leave moving to the load address to atf.c
      ARM: rockchip: pack the device tree passed to TF-A and OP-TEE

 arch/arm/boards/pine64-pinetab2/lowlevel.c         | 10 +----
 arch/arm/boards/pine64-quartz64/lowlevel.c         |  5 +--
 arch/arm/boards/protonic-prtpuk/lowlevel.c         |  5 +--
 arch/arm/boards/protonic-rk356x/lowlevel.c         |  5 +--
 arch/arm/boards/qnap-tsx33/lowlevel.c              | 18 +--------
 arch/arm/boards/radxa-cm3/lowlevel.c               |  5 +--
 arch/arm/boards/radxa-rock3/lowlevel.c             |  5 +--
 arch/arm/boards/radxa-rock5/lowlevel.c             | 10 +----
 arch/arm/boards/rockchip-rk3562-evb2/lowlevel.c    |  5 +--
 .../boards/rockchip-rk3562-kickpi-k3/lowlevel.c    |  5 +--
 .../boards/rockchip-rk3568-bpi-r2pro/lowlevel.c    |  5 +--
 arch/arm/boards/rockchip-rk3568-evb/lowlevel.c     |  5 +--
 arch/arm/boards/wolfvision-pf5/lowlevel.c          |  9 +----
 arch/arm/boards/xunlong-orangepi-5-plus/lowlevel.c |  5 +--
 arch/arm/mach-rockchip/atf.c                       | 47 +++++++++++++++++++---
 15 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-)
---
base-commit: 4aa5dcd400d5b9cecfd24e68c6f05cd128c75c43
change-id: 20261001-rockchip-early-boottime-b981093bde02

Best regards,
-- 
Sascha Hauer <[email protected]>


Reply via email to