[U-Boot] [PATCH 9/9] ARM: uniphier: move SBC and Support Card init code to U-Boot proper

Initialize SBC and Support Card in U-Boot proper instead of SPL. We may run different firmware (ex. ARM Trusted Firmware) before U-Boot, and basic SoC initialization may be done there. In that case, SPL may not be used. The motivation for preparing SBC and Support Card in SPL was to use LED for

[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/9] ARM: uniphier: split out UMC clock enable

The clock enable bits for UMC are more SoC-specific than for the other hardware blocks. Separate the UMC clocks and the other clocks for better code reuse across SoCs. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada --- arch/arm/mach-uniphier/clk/Makefile| 18

[U-Boot] [PATCH 8/9] ARM: uniphier: refactor spl_init_board()

Merge init-*.c into a single file using a table of callbacks because the initialization flow is almost common among SoCs. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada --- arch/arm/mach-uniphier/Makefile | 3 +- arch/arm/mach-uniphier/clk/Makefile | 6 +-

[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/9] ARM: uniphier: remove unneeded argument of uniphier_ld20_pll_init()

At first, we thought the LD20 PLL setting would be board dependent, but this argument turned out unneeded after all. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada --- arch/arm/mach-uniphier/board_init.c | 8 +--- arch/arm/mach-uniphier/clk/pll-ld20.c | 4 +---

[U-Boot] [PATCH 6/9] ARM: uniphier: make BCU init into void function

These functions never fail, so no need to return a value. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada --- arch/arm/mach-uniphier/bcu/bcu-ld4.c | 4 +--- arch/arm/mach-uniphier/bcu/bcu-sld3.c | 4 +--- arch/arm/mach-uniphier/init.h | 4 ++-- 3 files changed, 4

[U-Boot] [PATCH 0/9] ARM: uniphier: UniPhier changes for v2017.03-rc1

Mostly cleanups of SoC init code. Masahiro Yamada (9): ARM: uniphier: remove unneeded argument of uniphier_ld20_pll_init() ARM: uniphier: split out UMC clock enable ARM: uniphier: refactor MEMCONF init code ARM: uniphier: refactor SBC init code ARM: uniphier: refactor Support Card init

[U-Boot] [PATCH 7/9] ARM: uniphier: refactor board_init()

The code here is cluttered due to the switch statement. Introduce a table of callbacks to clean up the initialization code across SoCs. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada --- arch/arm/mach-uniphier/board_init.c | 219 +++- 1 file

[U-Boot] [PATCH 3/9] ARM: uniphier: refactor MEMCONF init code

Currently, memconf-sld3.c and memconf-pxs2.c duplicate the code. There are 3 patterns in terms of MEMCONF init: - DRAM 2 channels: LD4, sLD8, Pro4, Pro5, LD11 - DRAM 3 channels: sLD3 - DRAM 3 channels (Ch2 is disable by MEMCONF[21]): Pxs2, LD20 All of them can be moved into a single file

[U-Boot] [PATCH 4/9] ARM: uniphier: refactor SBC init code

Merge sbc-admulti.c and sbc-savepin.c into a single file to avoid code duplication. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada --- arch/arm/mach-uniphier/init.h | 27 ++- arch/arm/mach-uniphier/init/init-ld11.c| 6 +--

[U-Boot] [PATCH 5/9] ARM: uniphier: refactor Support Card init code

Splitting reset assertion (support_card_reset) and deassertion (support_card_init) is not adding much value any more. Handle all the initialization of Support Card in support_card_init(), then remove support_card_reset(). Also, detect_num_flash_banks() can have a static qualifier.

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v3 1/2] Convert CONFIG_SPL_RAM_DEVICE to defconfig

On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 01:14:42PM -0800, Stefan Agner wrote: > Hi Tom, > > I think this did not get applied yet? Thanks for the reminder, testing this now. > > -- > Stefan > > On 2016-12-22 22:51, Stefan Agner wrote: > > From: Stefan Agner > > > > This converts

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v3 1/2] Convert CONFIG_SPL_RAM_DEVICE to defconfig

Hi Tom, I think this did not get applied yet? -- Stefan On 2016-12-22 22:51, Stefan Agner wrote: > From: Stefan Agner > > This converts the following to Kconfig: > CONFIG_SPL_RAM_DEVICE > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Agner > --- > > Changes

Re: [U-Boot] [U-Boot, 1/4] omap3_logic: Rework MACH_TYPE and fdtfile logic

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 05:22:05PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > The MACH_TYPE values for the omap37xx based platforms are no longer > officially valid, so we must not set and pass them. In order to not > reference them but still be able to set the default fdtfile based on the > board detection logic

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Kconfig: CONFIG_OF_PLATDATA doesn't really exist

On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 12:21:39PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > There is no CONFIG_OF_PLATDATA, only CONFIG_SPL_OF_PLATDATA, so rename > the two references to CONFIG_OF_PLATDATA to CONFIG_SPL_OF_PLATDATA. > > Signed-off-by: Tom Rini Applied to u-boot/master, thanks! -- Tom

Re: [U-Boot] [U-Boot, 4/4] arm: Re-sync asm/mach-types.h with Linux Kernel v4.9

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 05:22:08PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > This re-syncs the MACH_TYPE_xxx values from the Linux Kernel v4.9 > release. In addition this removes all of the machine_arch_type and > machine_is_xxx logic that is unused in U-Boot. This removal removes a > large number of otherwise

Re: [U-Boot] [U-Boot, 3/4] arm: Remove unregister MACH_TYPE_xxx uses

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 05:22:07PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > Before we can sync with the latest mach-types.h file from the Linux > Kernel we need to remove some instances of MACH_TYPE_xxx from our > sources. As these values have been removed from the canonical upstream > source we should not be

Re: [U-Boot] [U-Boot, 2/4] omap3_igep00x0: Rework MACH_TYPE and status LED logic slightly

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 05:22:06PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > The MACH_TYPE for IGEP0032 was never officially used and has been > removed from upstream, so we must not use it. In order to remove this > we need to rework the status LED logic. > > Cc: Enric Balletbo i Serra >

Re: [U-Boot] Please pull u-boot-fdt

On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:14:44AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > Just a few fixes. > > The following changes since commit 70c1e0474a9df2c4493b4e2330cc41d3132b4e90: > > Merge git://git.denx.de/u-boot-rockchip (2017-01-12 21:20:51 -0500) > > are available in the git repository at: >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] ARM: dts: uniphier: add UniPhier specific compatible to eMMC node

2017-01-04 20:08 GMT+09:00 Masahiro Yamada : > The "cdns,sd4hc" is a fallback of the IP. Add the SoC-specific > compatible string. > > Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada Applied to u-boot-uniphier/master. -- Best Regards Masahiro

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] ARM: uniphier: enable Cadence eMMC controller for LD11/LD20

2017-01-04 20:08 GMT+09:00 Masahiro Yamada : > Enable SDMA (Single Operation DMA) for LD11, but not for LD20. > The SDMA does not work for LD20 boards because they are generally > equipped with more memory than fits in the 32 bit physical address > space supported by

[U-Boot] [PATCH] rockchip: Correct MAINTAINER entry for chromebook_minnie

This is wrong at present, so genboardscfg.py gives the following warnings: WARNING: no status info for 'chromebook_minnie' WARNING: no maintainers for 'chromebook_minnie' Fix it. Signed-off-by: Simon Glass --- board/google/veyron/MAINTAINERS | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Kconfig: CONFIG_OF_PLATDATA doesn't really exist

There is no CONFIG_OF_PLATDATA, only CONFIG_SPL_OF_PLATDATA, so rename the two references to CONFIG_OF_PLATDATA to CONFIG_SPL_OF_PLATDATA. Signed-off-by: Tom Rini --- common/spl/spl.c | 2 +- drivers/serial/Kconfig | 2 +- scripts/config_whitelist.txt | 1 -

[U-Boot] Please pull u-boot-fdt

Hi Tom, Just a few fixes. The following changes since commit 70c1e0474a9df2c4493b4e2330cc41d3132b4e90: Merge git://git.denx.de/u-boot-rockchip (2017-01-12 21:20:51 -0500) are available in the git repository at: git://git.denx.de/u-boot-fdt.git for you to fetch changes up to

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2] cmd/fdt: Make fdt get value endian-safe for single-cell properties

On 12 January 2017 at 19:19, Simon Glass wrote: > On 9 January 2017 at 08:08, Andreas Färber wrote: >> On a Raspberry Pi 2 disagreements on cell endianness can be observed: >> >> U-Boot> fdt print /soc/gpio@7e20 phandle >> phandle = <0x000d> >>

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 11/12] aspeed: Device Tree for ast2500 Eval Board

On 4 January 2017 at 12:46, Maxim Sloyko wrote: > Signed-off-by: Maxim Sloyko Please add a commit message explaining where it came from. > --- > > arch/arm/dts/Makefile| 2 ++ > arch/arm/dts/ast2500-evb.dts | 23 +++ > 2 files

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] cmd: fdt: Print error message when fdt application fails

On 17 December 2016 at 15:48, Simon Glass wrote: > On 16 December 2016 at 02:33, Maxime Ripard > wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 03:03:27PM -0800, Stefan Agner wrote: >>> From: Stefan Agner >>> >>> There are lots

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/2] libfdt: Correct fdt handling of overlays without fixups and base trees without symbols

On 25 December 2016 at 22:24, Simon Glass wrote: > On 21 December 2016 at 03:58, Stefan Agner wrote: >> From: David Gibson >> >> The fdt_overlay_apply() function purports to support the edge cases where >> an overlay has no fixups

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 12/12] aspeed: Configuration for ast2500 eval board

Hi Maxim, On 4 January 2017 at 12:46, Maxim Sloyko wrote: > --- > Commit message? > --- > > Signed-off-by: Maxim Sloyko > --- > arch/arm/mach-aspeed/ast2500/Kconfig | 7 +++ > board/aspeed/evb_ast2500/Kconfig | 12 >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 08/12] aspeed/ast2500: Add SDRAM MC driver

Hi Maxim, On 4 January 2017 at 12:46, Maxim Sloyko wrote: > The driver is very ast2500 specific and is completely incompatible ast2500-specific > with previous versions of the chip. > > The memory controller is very poorly documented by Aspeed in the > datasheet, with any

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 10/12] aspeed: Common configuration parameters for aspeed boards

Hi Maxim, On 4 January 2017 at 12:46, Maxim Sloyko wrote: > Signed-off-by: Maxim Sloyko > --- > > include/configs/aspeed-common.h | 84 > + > 1 file changed, 84 insertions(+) > create mode 100644

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 09/12] aspeed/ast2500: Common board init functions for ast2500 based boards

Hi Maxim, On 4 January 2017 at 12:46, Maxim Sloyko wrote: > Signed-off-by: Maxim Sloyko > --- > > arch/arm/mach-aspeed/Makefile| 2 +- > arch/arm/mach-aspeed/ast2500-board.c | 74 > > 2 files changed, 75

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 06/12] aspeed/ast2500: Add Clock Driver

Hi Maxim, On 4 January 2017 at 12:46, Maxim Sloyko wrote: > This driver is ast2500 specific and is not compatible with earlier ast2500-specific > versions of this chip. The differences are not that large, but they are > in somewhat random places, so making it compatible with

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 07/12] aspeed/ast2500: Helper function to get access to SCU

Hi Maxim, On 4 January 2017 at 12:46, Maxim Sloyko wrote: > Helper function to get access to SCU (System Control Unit) through Clock > driver. This is similar to rockchip_get_cru function, which was used as > an example. > > It will be used by other drivers to get access to

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 05/12] aspeed/ast2500: Device Tree and bindings for some of the clocks

Hi Maxim, On 5 January 2017 at 15:20, Maxim Sloyko wrote: > On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 7:26 PM, Tom Rini wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 05:18:42PM -0800, Maxim Sloyko wrote: >>> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Tom Rini wrote: >>> > On

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 04/12] aspeed: Add sysreset driver

On 4 January 2017 at 12:46, Maxim Sloyko wrote: > The driver uses watchdog timer to do resets and particular > watchdog device to use is hardcoded (0) > > Signed-off-by: Maxim Sloyko > --- > > drivers/sysreset/Makefile | 1 + >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 03/12] aspeed: Add Timer Support

Hi Maxim, On 4 January 2017 at 12:46, Maxim Sloyko wrote: > Add support for timer for Aspeed ast2400/ast2500 devices. > The driver actually controls several devices, but because all devices > share the same Control Register, it is somewhat difficult to completely > decouple

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 02/12] aspeed: Add support for Watchdot Timer

Hi Maxim, On 4 January 2017 at 12:46, Maxim Sloyko wrote: > The driver is compatible with AST2400 and AST2500 watchdogs. > There is no uclass for Watchdog yet, so the driver does not follow > the driver model. It also uses fixed clock, so no clock driver > is needed. > > #

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 01/12] aspeed: Add mach-aspeed directory and basic Kconfig

Hi Maxim, On 4 January 2017 at 12:46, Maxim Sloyko wrote: > Signed-off-by: Maxim Sloyko > --- > > arch/arm/Kconfig | 7 +++ > arch/arm/Makefile | 1 + > arch/arm/mach-aspeed/Kconfig | 15 +++ >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V3 2/7] ARM: dts: exnyos4210-universl_c210: add i2c_5 and pmic nodes

On 8 January 2017 at 22:47, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > Add the i2c_5 node and pmic as its child node. > > Signed-off-by: Jaehoon Chung > --- > arch/arm/dts/exynos4210-universal_c210.dts | 164 > + > 1 file changed, 164

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 4/7] ARM: dts: exnyos4210-universl_c210: add i2c_5 and pmic nodes

On 5 January 2017 at 03:16, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > Add the i2c_5 node and pmic as its child node. > > Signed-off-by: Jaehoon Chung > --- > arch/arm/dts/exynos4210-universal_c210.dts | 164 > + > 1 file changed, 164

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] armv8: fsl-layerscape: Fix SECURE_BOOT config

On 4 January 2017 at 11:32, York Sun wrote: > Without a prompt in Kconfig, SECURE_BOOT cannot be selected by > defconfig. The option was dropped unintentionally when defconfig > files were cleaned up. Three targets were impacted > ls1043ardb_SECURE_BOOT, ls2080ardb_SECURE_BOOT,

Re: [U-Boot] Rockchip RK3288 regulator device table problem

Hi Rick, On 3 January 2017 at 11:21, Rick Bronson wrote: > Hi Simon, > > I'm not sure what to do about (in drivers/power/regulator/rk808.c): > > static const struct rk808_reg_info rk808_ldo[] = { > { 100, 10, LDO1_ON_VSEL, 5, }, > ... > > I had to change this

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/1] common/image.c: prefixes for binary multiples

On 4 January 2017 at 05:45, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > IEC 8-13:2008 Quantities and units > Part 13: Information science and technology > > defines the prefixes to use for binary multiples. > > Instead of writing > Data Size:6726132 Bytes = 6568.49 kB = 6.41 MB > in

Re: [U-Boot] u-boot.git or u-boot-x86.git for x86_64 u-boots?

Hi Joakim, On 14 January 2017 at 04:51, Bin Meng wrote: > +Simon, > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:12 AM, Joakim Tjernlund > wrote: >> I found two repos w.r.t x86_64 for u-boot, which one should I use? >> > > U-Boot x86_64 support is not in

Re: [U-Boot] [U-Boot,v6,11/13] sunxi: Use binman for sunxi boards

On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 02:38:02PM +0100, Emmanuel Vadot wrote: > On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 22:08:03 -0700 > Simon Glass wrote: > > > Hi Emmanuel, > > > > On 28 December 2016 at 03:57, Emmanuel Vadot wrote: > > > On Wed, 28 Dec 2016 11:30:10 +0100 > > >

Re: [U-Boot] [linux-sunxi] [PATCH 1/2] sunxi: dts: OrangePi Zero: add Ethernet node

Can you simultaneously use both Ethernet interfaces on the A64? I've received conflicting answers to this question. On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 9:06 PM, Andre Przywara wrote: > The OrangePi Zero can happily use the EMAC along with its integrated > PHY to use Ethernet (for

Re: [U-Boot] u-boot.git or u-boot-x86.git for x86_64 u-boots?

On Sat, 2017-01-14 at 19:51 +0800, Bin Meng wrote: > +Simon, > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:12 AM, Joakim Tjernlund > wrote: > > I found two repos w.r.t x86_64 for u-boot, which one should I use? > > > > U-Boot x86_64 support is not in mainstream yet. So I should

Re: [U-Boot] [U-Boot,v6,11/13] sunxi: Use binman for sunxi boards

On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 22:08:03 -0700 Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Emmanuel, > > On 28 December 2016 at 03:57, Emmanuel Vadot wrote: > > On Wed, 28 Dec 2016 11:30:10 +0100 > > Emmanuel Vadot wrote: > > > >> > >> Hello Simon, > >> > >>

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 60/63] x86: link: Set up device tree for SPL

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Add the correct pre-relocation tag so that the required device tree nodes > are present in the SPL device tree. > > On x86 it doesn't make a lot of sense to have a separate SPL device tree. > Since everything is in the same

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 61/63] x86: link: Add build options for SPL

Hi Simon, On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > If SPL is used we want to use the generic SPL framework and boot from SPI > via a board-specific means. Add these options to the board config file. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 63/63] x86: link: Add a config for 64-bit U-Boot

Hi Simon, On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Add a new link config which uses 64-bit U-Boot. This is not fully > functional but is it a start. Missing features: > > - SDRAM sizing > - Booting linux > - EFI support > - SCSI device init > (and others) > >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 62/63] x86: Update compile/link flags to support 64-bit U-Boot

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Update config.mk settings to support both 32-bit and 64-bit U-Boot. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > arch/x86/config.mk | 30 -- >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 59/63] x86: link: Add SPL declarations to the binman image

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > When building for 64-bit we need to put an SPL binary into the image. Update > the binman image description to reflect this. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 55/63] x86: Move call64 to the i386 directory

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > This code is only used in 32-bit mode. Move it so that it does not get > built with 64-bit U-Boot. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > arch/x86/cpu/Makefile| 2 +-

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 58/63] x86: link: Add a text base for 64-bit U-Boot

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Set up the 64-bit U-Boot text base if building for that target. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > board/google/chromebook_link/Kconfig | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 57/63] x86: Add a dummy setjmp implementation for x86_64

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > We don't have the code for this yet. Add a dummy version for now, so that > EFI builds correctly. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: > - Add the 'val' parameter to longjmp() > >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 56/63] x86: Move setjmp to the i386 directory

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > This code is only used in 32-bit mode. Move it so that it does not get > built with 64-bit U-Boot. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > arch/x86/cpu/Makefile| 3

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 51/63] x86: Support jumping from SPL to U-Boot

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Add a rough function to handle jumping from 32-bit SPL to 64-bit U-Boot. > This still needs work to clean it up. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > arch/x86/cpu/call64.S

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 54/63] x86: Change irq_already_routed to a local variable

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > This avoids using BSS before SDRAM is set up in SPL. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > arch/x86/lib/pirq_routing.c | 10 ++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 52/63] x86: Move pirq_routing_table to global_data

Hi Simon, On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > To avoid using BSS in SPL before SDRAM is set up, move this field to > global_data. > Why is this needed? pirq routing table setup is done after SDRAM initialization. Isn't SPL doing this with a different order?

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 50/63] x86: Drop interrupt support in 64-bit mode

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > This is not currently supported, so drop the code. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > arch/x86/lib/interrupts.c | 5 + > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > Reviewed-by:

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 49/63] x86: Don't try to boot Linux from SPL

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Booting into linux from 64-bit U-Boot is not yet supported. Avoid bringing > in the bootm code until it is implemented. > > Of course 32-bit U-Boot still supported booting into both 32- and 64-bit > kernels. > >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 47/63] x86: Don't build cpu files which are not supported on 64-bit

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Some files cannot be built with 64-bit and mostly don't make sense in that > context. Disable them. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > arch/x86/cpu/Makefile | 9 - >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 46/63] x86: Don't build call64 and setjmp on 64-bit

Hi Simon, On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > These are currently not supported. Calling 64-bit code from 64-bit U-Boot is > much simpler, so this code is not needed. setjmp() is not yet implemented for > 64-bit. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 48/63] x86: Don't build 32-bit efi files on x86_64

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > These cannot be built in this mode, so drop them. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > arch/x86/lib/Makefile | 4 > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > Reviewed-by: Bin

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 40/63] x86: Drop flag_is_changable() on x86_64

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > This doesn't build at present and is not used in a 64-bit build. Disable it > for now. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h | 3 +++ > 1 file

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 45/63] x86: Don't try to run the VGA BIOS in 64-bit mode

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > This is not supported, so disable it for now. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > arch/x86/lib/Makefile | 2 ++ > drivers/pci/pci_rom.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 3

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 42/63] x86: Mention the MRC region in the README

Hi Simon, On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > This is left out of the example memory map. Add it to avoid confusion. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > doc/README.x86 | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 43/63] x86: ivybridge: Skipt SATA init in SPL

Hi Simon, On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > This doesn't work at present. Disable it for now. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > arch/x86/cpu/ivybridge/Makefile | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 44/63] x86: ivybridge: Provide a dummy SDRAM init for 64-bit

Hi Simon, On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > We don't support SDRAM init in 64-bit mode since it is essentially > impossible to get into that mode before SDRAM set up. Provide dummy functions > for now. At some point we will need to pass the SDRAM parameters

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 41/63] x86: Fix up type sizes for 64-bit

Hi Simon, On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Adjust types as needed to support 64-bit compilation. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > arch/x86/include/asm/posix_types.h | 5 + >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 36/63] x86: Add a link script for 64-bit x86

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > This needs a different image format from 32-bit x86, so add a new link > script. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > arch/x86/cpu/config.mk | 6 >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 39/63] x86: Fix up byteorder.h for x86_64

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Remove the very old x86 code and add support for 64-bit. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > arch/x86/include/asm/byteorder.h | 17 + > 1 file changed, 9

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 37/63] x86: Add a link script for SPL

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > If SPL is used it is always build in 32-bit mode. Add a link script to > handle the correct placement of the sections. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 38/63] x86: Add SPL build rules for start-up code

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > When SPL is used we need to build the 16-bit start-up code. Add Makefile > rules to handle this. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > scripts/Makefile.spl | 9 - > 1

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 35/63] x86: Fix up CONFIG_X86_64 check

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > When SPL and U-Boot proper have different settings for this flag, we need to > use the correct one. Fix this up in the interrupt code. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 34/63] x86: Support global_data on x86_64

Hi Simon, On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > At present this is just an ordinary variable. We may consider making it a > fixed register in the future. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 31/63] x86: Add an SPL implementation

Hi Simon, On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > SPL needs to set up the machine ready for loading 64-bit U-Boot and jumping > to it. Call the existing init routines in order to accomplish this. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 33/63] x86: Add cpu code for x86_64

Hi Simon, On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > There is not much needed at present, but set up a separate directory to put > this code as it grows. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > arch/x86/cpu/Makefile

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 30/63] x86: Tidy up use of size_t in relocation

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Addresses should not be cast to size_t. Use uintptr_t instead. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > arch/x86/lib/relocate.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 32/63] x86: Move the i386 code into its own directory

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Much of the cpu and interrupt code cannot be compiled on 64-bit x86. Move it > into its own directory and build it only in 32-bit mode. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 29/63] x86: Add support for 64-bit relocation

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Add a 64-bit relocation function. SPL loads U-Boot into RAM at a fixed > address and runs it. U-Boot then relocates itself to the top of RAM using > this relocation function. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass

Re: [U-Boot] u-boot.git or u-boot-x86.git for x86_64 u-boots?

Hi Joakim, On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 9:25 PM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > On Sat, 2017-01-14 at 19:51 +0800, Bin Meng wrote: >> +Simon, >> >> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:12 AM, Joakim Tjernlund >> wrote: >> > I found two repos w.r.t x86_64

Re: [U-Boot] u-boot.git or u-boot-x86.git for x86_64 u-boots?

+Simon, On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:12 AM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > I found two repos w.r.t x86_64 for u-boot, which one should I use? > U-Boot x86_64 support is not in mainstream yet. > I am ATM only looking at USING the qemu-x86 target for now. > > BTW, I found

Re: [U-Boot] [linux-sunxi] [PATCH 2/2] sunxi: OrangePi Zero: defconfig: enable SPI flash

On Sat, 2017-01-14 at 02:06 +, Andre Przywara wrote: > Newer OrangePi Zero boards all come with 16 Mib SPI flash soldered, > from > which the board can actually boot from. > Enable the SPL support for the SPI controller and SPI flash to allow > putting the SPL, the DT and U-Boot proper into