On Wed, 28 Sep 2022, Michal Suchánek wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 10:26:35AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, 09 Sep 2022, Kever Yang wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Lee Jones,
> > >
> > > On 2022/9/8 15:44, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 11
On Fri, 09 Sep 2022, Kever Yang wrote:
> Hi Lee Jones,
>
> On 2022/9/8 15:44, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Aug 2022, Lee Jones wrote:
> >
> > > This set fixes several issues found on the Rock Pi 4.
> > >
> > > For
On Fri, 09 Sep 2022, Kever Yang wrote:
> Hi Lee Jones,
>
> On 2022/9/8 15:44, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Aug 2022, Lee Jones wrote:
> >
> > > This set fixes several issues found on the Rock Pi 4.
> > >
> > > For
On Thu, 11 Aug 2022, Lee Jones wrote:
> This set fixes several issues found on the Rock Pi 4.
>
> For full context, please see this initial bug report:
>
> "There appear to be a number of issues with the Rockchip rk3399 DDR RAM
>
> initialis
before ramping up
to the final value running value of 800MHz after everything has been
successfully configured.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/yo4v3juehxtov...@google.com/
Suggested-by: YouMin Chen
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
Tested-by: Xavier Drudis Ferran
Reviewed-by: Kever Yang
---
drivers
Frequency changes to 400MHz are presently reported as:
lpddr4_set_rate_0: change freq to 4 mhz 0, 1
This is obviously wrong by 6 orders of magnitude.
Ensure frequency changes are reported accurately.
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
Tested-by: Xavier Drudis Ferran
Reviewed-by: Kever Yang
Functions pointed to by this op pointer can return non-zero values
indicating an error. Ensure any error value is propagated back up the
call-chain.
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
Tested-by: Xavier Drudis Ferran
Reviewed-by: Kever Yang
---
drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3399.c | 4 +++-
1 file
d -22
So my question is; does Rockchip, or anyone else for that matter, have
any plans on updating Mainline U-Boot with the upgraded/working LPDDR4
initialisation sequence?"
Lee Jones (3):
ram: rk3399: Fix .set_rate_ind
On Mon, 04 Jul 2022, Kever Yang wrote:
> Hi
>
> On 2022/7/4 17:23, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, 01 Jul 2022, Kever Yang wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Lee Jones,
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2022/6/27 16:39, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > On Tu
On Fri, 01 Jul 2022, Kever Yang wrote:
> Hi Lee Jones,
>
>
> On 2022/6/27 16:39, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Jun 2022, Lee Jones wrote:
> >
> > > Functions pointed to by this op pointer can return non-zero values
> > > indicating an error. En
On Tue, 21 Jun 2022, Lee Jones wrote:
> Functions pointed to by this op pointer can return non-zero values
> indicating an error. Ensure any error value is propagated back up the
> call-chain.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
> ---
> drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3399.c | 4 +
before ramping up
to the final value running value of 800MHz after everything has been
successfully configured.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/yo4v3juehxtov...@google.com/
Suggested-by: YouMin Chen
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
---
drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3399.c | 36
Frequency changes to 400MHz are presently reported as:
lpddr4_set_rate_0: change freq to 4 mhz 0, 1
This is obviously wrong by 6 orders of magnitude.
Ensure frequency changes are reported accurately.
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
---
drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3399.c | 4 ++--
1 file
Functions pointed to by this op pointer can return non-zero values
indicating an error. Ensure any error value is propagated back up the
call-chain.
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
---
drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3399.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers
problem. Thank you so much!
Would you like to submit this into upstream U-boot yourself, or would
you like me to do that for you?
If the former, please Cc me on the patch and add my:
Tested-by Lee Jones
If the latter, please let me know and I'll do what I can to help.
--
Lee Jones
On Wed, 25 May 2022, Lee Jones wrote:
> Good afternoon,
>
>
>
> There appear to be a number of issues wi
[0]
https://github.com/rockchip-linux/rkbin/blob/master/bin/rk33/rk3399_ddr_933MHz_v1.25.bin
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Principal
On Thu, 19 May 2022, Peter Geis wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 1:36 PM Peter Geis wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 1:23 PM Lee Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 19 May 2022, Lee Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 19 May 2022, Peter Ge
On Thu, 19 May 2022, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 19 May 2022, Peter Geis wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 11:47 AM Lee Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 19 May 2022, Lee Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 19 May 2022, Peter Geis wrote:
>
On Thu, 19 May 2022, Peter Geis wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 11:47 AM Lee Jones wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 19 May 2022, Lee Jones wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 19 May 2022, Peter Geis wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 10:56 AM Lee Jones
On Thu, 19 May 2022, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 19 May 2022, Peter Geis wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 10:56 AM Lee Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > It's not clear how this issue (present 3 years ago) was finally
> > > > > > >
On Thu, 19 May 2022, Peter Geis wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 10:56 AM Lee Jones wrote:
> >
> > > > > > It's not clear how this issue (present 3 years ago) was finally
> > > > > > resolved. From the thread, it looks as if the fix might have m
result I had was using our downstream u-boot
with Mainline TF-A. It booted perfectly from cold, but managed to get
stuck in the TPL on soft reboot in a very similar way to the one I
reported earlier when not booting with TF-A ("Channel 1: col error"):
https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/hwmBzxDBgc/
Thanks again for your insight.
Kind regards,
Lee
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Principal Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
On Wed, 18 May 2022, Peter Geis wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 7:56 AM Lee Jones wrote:
> >
> > Looping int a few relevant/active kernel people/lists for full coverage.
> >
> > On Sun, 01 Dec 2019, Hugh Cole-Baker wrote:
> > > > On 29 Nov 2019, at 01:06, V
][C5] _regmap_bus_reg_read+0x3c/0x90
[0.702614][C5] _regmap_read+0xb0/0x24c
[0.702623][C5] rockchip_pd_power+0x6c4/0xbc0
[0.702638][C5] rockchip_pd_power_off+0x18/0x28
[0.702652][C5] _genpd_power_off+0x178/0x388
[0.702663][C5] genpd_power_off+0x188/0
Hi Simon,
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 6:33 AM, Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org wrote:
Boottime is a tool which can be used for full system booting time
measurement. Bootloader boot time is passed to the kernel component
though ATAGS. The kernel-side driver then uses this information
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Lee Jones,
In message 20121127085548.gc7...@gmail.com you wrote:
By the way, if Wolfgang didn't want these tracepoints in DT, then
how was your implementations upstreamed into u-boot?
Because I don;t manage a 100% review coverage over
Hi Simon,
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 6:33 AM, Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org wrote:
Boottime is a tool which can be used for full system booting time
measurement. Bootloader boot time is passed to the kernel component
though ATAGS. The kernel-side driver then uses this information
consider it a design flaw to do such statictics stuff in the kernel.
It does not belong there. Such functions belong to user space.
I don't agree.
But as mentioned before, this is actually off topic here.
Then stop mentioning it. ;)
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
stopped to ask me about it at kernel
conferences. Let's find a nice, long lasting way to solve it.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
___
U-Boot mailing
, that's why ATAGs were brought about wasn't it?
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de
.
Please come up with a solution that works for all architectures
instead.
So I guess Device Tree it is then.
Kind regards,
Lee
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
On Tue, 20 Nov 2012, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Lee Jones,
In message 1353422034-28107-5-git-send-email-lee.jo...@linaro.org you wrote:
Here we add boottime tags to the start of the main loop and just
before the opportunity to break into the u-boot shell. This will
provide a more verbose
reams of otherwise useless logging scrawled
throughout their bootlog. We'd also have a write a text parser
to obtain the information for processing. It would be easier
to either pass in a struct, as we do with the ATAG mechanism,
or though Device Tree as previously discussed.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST
be able to lend a hand here, as I'm no mathematician?
What are the correct arithmetics?
Kind regards,
Lee
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
___
U
regards,
Lee
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
then have to write a text parser to process this
information? Sounds horrendous. Hopefully, I have missed something
and it's actually easier than what I've mentioned.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter
you're suggesting that we create a userland portion of the driver
too? I don't think this is acceptable. This tool will be used by
kernel engineers, who would be more happy taking the information from
debugfs. At least I know I would.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org
be needed here.
As above.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
.
It looked to me as though it took an integer identifier, which
isn't going to mean anything to anyone. Unless there is a way to
change the semantics of the function so that it would take a string,
but then how would it play with the existing show_boot_progress()
calls?
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Lee Jones,
In message 20121121150332.gc28...@gmail.com you wrote:
Neither ATAGS not the device tree are intended nor designed for
passing logfile information. Yes, you can use them like that, and it
will actually work.
ATAGs were
. This is the solution to that
problem.
1. Enable boottime config
2. Enable debugfs config (if it's not already)
3. Mount debugfs (if it's not already)
4. cat /sys/kernel/debug/[summary|bootgraph]
Simples.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source
In this patch-set we're attempting to add boottime measurement
support to u-boot. A patch-set has already hit the kernel MLs
which intends to solve the other half of the puzzle.
This new tool allows an engineer to apply tags into key areas
around the bootloader, which are then passed to the Linux
, the issue vanishes.
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org
---
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u8500/timer.c |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u8500/timer.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u8500/timer.c
index 79aad99..40326d8 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7
Provide support for microsecond level timer support.
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org
---
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u8500/timer.c |5 +
include/common.h |1 +
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u8500/timer.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7
by Jonas Aaberg.
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org
---
common/Makefile|1 +
common/boottime.c | 146
include/boottime.h | 86 +++
3 files changed, 233 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 common
Here we add boottime tags to the start of the main loop and just
before the opportunity to break into the u-boot shell. This will
provide a more verbose bootgraph when viewed within debugfs.
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org
---
common/main.c |5 +
1 file changed, 5
This patch adds support for passing boot time information to
the Linus kernel using ATAGS when booting on ARM based devices.
Based heavily on the original driver by Jonas Aaberg.
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org
---
arch/arm/include/asm/setup.h | 18 +
arch/arm
Allow the bootloader to pass bootloader specific boot-up time
information to the Linux kernel via ATAGs when booting the db8500
based HREF development board.
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org
---
include/configs/u8500_href.h |2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git
Allow the bootloader to pass bootloader specific boot-up time
information to the Linux kernel via ATAGs when booting the db8500
based Snowball development board.
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org
---
include/configs/snowball.h |2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git
This will provide a more verbose bootgraph when viewed within debugfs.
It will also ensure that we have a tag at the latest possible point
in the bootloader, right before we pass the ATAGs though to the kernel.
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org
---
arch/arm/lib/board.c |3
On Tue, 20 Nov 2012, Otavio Salvador wrote:
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org wrote:
This patch adds support for passing boot time information to
the Linus kernel using ATAGS when booting on ARM based devices.
Linus or Linux?
Linux.
I'll fix-up when
53 matches
Mail list logo
