Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 3/3] sunxi: Normalise FEL support

2015-02-10 Thread Siarhei Siamashka 
On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 15:23:17 -0700
Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:

 Hi Siarhei,
 
 On 7 February 2015 at 20:48, Siarhei Siamashka
 siarhei.siamas...@gmail.com wrote:
  On Sat,  7 Feb 2015 10:47:30 -0700
  Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
 
  Make sunxi's FEL code fit with the normal U-Boot boot sequence instead of
  creating its own. There are some #ifdefs required in start.S. Future work
  will hopefully remove these.
 
  This series is available at u-boot-dm, branch sunxi-working.
 
  Signed-off-by: Simon Glass s...@chromium.org
  ---
 
  Changes in v2:
  - Adjust for new save_boot_params() API
  - Drop patch to change r0 to r2 in start.S
  - Add #ifdefs to start.S to deal with FEL
  - Use 'Fast Early Loader' as the full name for FEL
 
  Thanks for working on these patches. It looks like we are finally
  getting really close to resolving the sunxi FEL boot problem.
 
  Some comments are below.
 
   arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S  |  5 +-
   arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile   |  4 +-
   arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c| 21 
   arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/config.mk  |  2 -
   arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S| 25 +
   arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/u-boot-spl-fel.lds | 82 
  -
   arch/arm/include/asm/arch-sunxi/sys_proto.h | 10 
   board/sunxi/Kconfig | 10 
   include/configs/sunxi-common.h  |  6 +--
   scripts/Makefile.spl|  2 -
   10 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 94 deletions(-)
   create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S
   delete mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/u-boot-spl-fel.lds
 
  diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
  index 9b49ece..098a83a 100644
  --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
  +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
  @@ -54,7 +54,8 @@ save_boot_params_ret:
* (OMAP4 spl TEXT_BASE is not 32 byte aligned.
* Continue to use ROM code vector only in OMAP4 spl)
*/
  -#if !(defined(CONFIG_OMAP44XX)  defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD))
  +#if !(defined(CONFIG_OMAP44XX)  defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD))  \
  + !defined(CONFIG_SPL_FEL)
 
  Maybe we can just update the 'save_boot_params' function to save the
  important configuration registers and then undo this configuration
  in 'return_to_fel'? This allows us to avoid the sunxi specific ifdefs
  in the core ARM code.
 
  In this particular case, restoring VBAR and CPSR is important because
  the BROM code uses an IRQ handler for FEL (presumably USB related).
  And we want to ensure that this IRQ handler works properly again
  after resuming the FEL code.
 
 We could indeed.
 
 It would avoid the #ifdef but my understanding is that you might be
 able to avoid having to 'return' to the BROM through another means. In
 any case we could perhaps leave that change until the next release?

I just previously thought that the FEL tool could store the return
address somewhere in beginning of SRAM in the eGON header extension.
In this case, restoring the 'lr' and 'sp' registers would be unnecessary
and the use of the 'save_boot_params' function could be dropped.

But if we still need to save/restore VBAR and the other control
registers, then this idea about not saving 'lr' and 'sp' does not
really improve anything.

[...]

   u32 spl_boot_device(void)
   {
  + /*
  +  * Have we been asked to return to the FEL portion of the boot ROM?
  +  * TODO: We need a more robust test here, or bracket this with
  +  * #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_FEL.
  +  */
  + if (fel_stash.lr = 0x  fel_stash.lr  0x4000)
  + return BOOT_DEVICE_BOARD;
return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1;
 
  It is probably better to do it this way:
 
  #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_FEL
  return BOOT_DEVICE_BOARD;
  #else
  if (memcmp((void *)4, eGON.BT0, 8) == 0)
  return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1;
  else
  return BOOT_DEVICE_BOARD;
  #endif
 
  The memcmp (or equivalent code) ensures that it is compatible with
  
  https://github.com/ssvb/sunxi-tools/commit/aa7e1880986e5c9a825b08aed9dc5621b821805f
 
  Then the new 'fel spl u-boot-sunxi-with-spl.bin' command for loading
  and executing the SPL works fine without CONFIG_SPL_FEL defined
  (because the SD card specific eGON.BT0 signature is replaced with
  the eGON.FEL signature by the 'fel' tool in the device memory
  before transferring control to the SPL code). Needless to say that
  the SPL built this way still works when written to the SD card.
 
  And if CONFIG_SPL_FEL is defined, then the FEL support still works in a
  legacy way (via 'fel write 0x2000 u-boot-spl.bin; fel exe 0x2000').
 
  We would only need to drop the legacy way in u-boot v2015.07 if the
  new one proves to be problem free by that time :-)
 
 So you mean that we can drop CONFIG_SPL_FEL?

Yes, we can already do this. But in order to play safe, the
CONFIG_SPL_FEL option could be still kept for

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 3/3] sunxi: Normalise FEL support

2015-02-10 Thread Simon Glass 
Hi Siarhei,

On 10 February 2015 at 20:05, Siarhei Siamashka
siarhei.siamas...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 15:23:17 -0700
 Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:

 Hi Siarhei,

 On 7 February 2015 at 20:48, Siarhei Siamashka
 siarhei.siamas...@gmail.com wrote:
  On Sat,  7 Feb 2015 10:47:30 -0700
  Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
 
  Make sunxi's FEL code fit with the normal U-Boot boot sequence instead of
  creating its own. There are some #ifdefs required in start.S. Future work
  will hopefully remove these.
 
  This series is available at u-boot-dm, branch sunxi-working.
 
  Signed-off-by: Simon Glass s...@chromium.org
  ---
 
  Changes in v2:
  - Adjust for new save_boot_params() API
  - Drop patch to change r0 to r2 in start.S
  - Add #ifdefs to start.S to deal with FEL
  - Use 'Fast Early Loader' as the full name for FEL
 
  Thanks for working on these patches. It looks like we are finally
  getting really close to resolving the sunxi FEL boot problem.
 
  Some comments are below.
 
   arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S  |  5 +-
   arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile   |  4 +-
   arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c| 21 
   arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/config.mk  |  2 -
   arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S| 25 +
   arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/u-boot-spl-fel.lds | 82 
  -
   arch/arm/include/asm/arch-sunxi/sys_proto.h | 10 
   board/sunxi/Kconfig | 10 
   include/configs/sunxi-common.h  |  6 +--
   scripts/Makefile.spl|  2 -
   10 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 94 deletions(-)
   create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S
   delete mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/u-boot-spl-fel.lds
 
  diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
  index 9b49ece..098a83a 100644
  --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
  +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
  @@ -54,7 +54,8 @@ save_boot_params_ret:
* (OMAP4 spl TEXT_BASE is not 32 byte aligned.
* Continue to use ROM code vector only in OMAP4 spl)
*/
  -#if !(defined(CONFIG_OMAP44XX)  defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD))
  +#if !(defined(CONFIG_OMAP44XX)  defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD))  \
  + !defined(CONFIG_SPL_FEL)
 
  Maybe we can just update the 'save_boot_params' function to save the
  important configuration registers and then undo this configuration
  in 'return_to_fel'? This allows us to avoid the sunxi specific ifdefs
  in the core ARM code.
 
  In this particular case, restoring VBAR and CPSR is important because
  the BROM code uses an IRQ handler for FEL (presumably USB related).
  And we want to ensure that this IRQ handler works properly again
  after resuming the FEL code.

 We could indeed.

 It would avoid the #ifdef but my understanding is that you might be
 able to avoid having to 'return' to the BROM through another means. In
 any case we could perhaps leave that change until the next release?

 I just previously thought that the FEL tool could store the return
 address somewhere in beginning of SRAM in the eGON header extension.
 In this case, restoring the 'lr' and 'sp' registers would be unnecessary
 and the use of the 'save_boot_params' function could be dropped.

 But if we still need to save/restore VBAR and the other control
 registers, then this idea about not saving 'lr' and 'sp' does not
 really improve anything.

OK I see see.


 [...]

   u32 spl_boot_device(void)
   {
  + /*
  +  * Have we been asked to return to the FEL portion of the boot ROM?
  +  * TODO: We need a more robust test here, or bracket this with
  +  * #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_FEL.
  +  */
  + if (fel_stash.lr = 0x  fel_stash.lr  0x4000)
  + return BOOT_DEVICE_BOARD;
return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1;
 
  It is probably better to do it this way:
 
  #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_FEL
  return BOOT_DEVICE_BOARD;
  #else
  if (memcmp((void *)4, eGON.BT0, 8) == 0)
  return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1;
  else
  return BOOT_DEVICE_BOARD;
  #endif
 
  The memcmp (or equivalent code) ensures that it is compatible with
  
  https://github.com/ssvb/sunxi-tools/commit/aa7e1880986e5c9a825b08aed9dc5621b821805f
 
  Then the new 'fel spl u-boot-sunxi-with-spl.bin' command for loading
  and executing the SPL works fine without CONFIG_SPL_FEL defined
  (because the SD card specific eGON.BT0 signature is replaced with
  the eGON.FEL signature by the 'fel' tool in the device memory
  before transferring control to the SPL code). Needless to say that
  the SPL built this way still works when written to the SD card.
 
  And if CONFIG_SPL_FEL is defined, then the FEL support still works in a
  legacy way (via 'fel write 0x2000 u-boot-spl.bin; fel exe 0x2000').
 
  We would only need to drop the legacy way in u-boot v2015.07 if the
  new one proves to be problem free by that time :-)

 So you mean that we can drop

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 3/3] sunxi: Normalise FEL support

2015-02-09 Thread Simon Glass 
Hi Siarhei,

On 7 February 2015 at 20:48, Siarhei Siamashka
siarhei.siamas...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Sat,  7 Feb 2015 10:47:30 -0700
 Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:

 Make sunxi's FEL code fit with the normal U-Boot boot sequence instead of
 creating its own. There are some #ifdefs required in start.S. Future work
 will hopefully remove these.

 This series is available at u-boot-dm, branch sunxi-working.

 Signed-off-by: Simon Glass s...@chromium.org
 ---

 Changes in v2:
 - Adjust for new save_boot_params() API
 - Drop patch to change r0 to r2 in start.S
 - Add #ifdefs to start.S to deal with FEL
 - Use 'Fast Early Loader' as the full name for FEL

 Thanks for working on these patches. It looks like we are finally
 getting really close to resolving the sunxi FEL boot problem.

 Some comments are below.

  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S  |  5 +-
  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile   |  4 +-
  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c| 21 
  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/config.mk  |  2 -
  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S| 25 +
  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/u-boot-spl-fel.lds | 82 
 -
  arch/arm/include/asm/arch-sunxi/sys_proto.h | 10 
  board/sunxi/Kconfig | 10 
  include/configs/sunxi-common.h  |  6 +--
  scripts/Makefile.spl|  2 -
  10 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 94 deletions(-)
  create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S
  delete mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/u-boot-spl-fel.lds

 diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
 index 9b49ece..098a83a 100644
 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
 +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
 @@ -54,7 +54,8 @@ save_boot_params_ret:
   * (OMAP4 spl TEXT_BASE is not 32 byte aligned.
   * Continue to use ROM code vector only in OMAP4 spl)
   */
 -#if !(defined(CONFIG_OMAP44XX)  defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD))
 +#if !(defined(CONFIG_OMAP44XX)  defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD))  \
 + !defined(CONFIG_SPL_FEL)

 Maybe we can just update the 'save_boot_params' function to save the
 important configuration registers and then undo this configuration
 in 'return_to_fel'? This allows us to avoid the sunxi specific ifdefs
 in the core ARM code.

 In this particular case, restoring VBAR and CPSR is important because
 the BROM code uses an IRQ handler for FEL (presumably USB related).
 And we want to ensure that this IRQ handler works properly again
 after resuming the FEL code.

We could indeed.

It would avoid the #ifdef but my understanding is that you might be
able to avoid having to 'return' to the BROM through another means. In
any case we could perhaps leave that change until the next release?


   /* Set V=0 in CP15 SCTLR register - for VBAR to point to vector */
   mrc p15, 0, r0, c1, c0, 0   @ Read CP15 SCTLR Register
   bic r0, #CR_V   @ V = 0
 @@ -67,7 +68,9 @@ save_boot_params_ret:

   /* the mask ROM code should have PLL and others stable */
  #ifndef CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT
 +#ifndef CONFIG_SPL_FEL

 Same here.

   bl  cpu_init_cp15
 +#endif
   bl  cpu_init_crit
  #endif

 diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile 
 b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile
 index 48db744..c1b975a 100644
 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile
 +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile
 @@ -38,7 +38,5 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN5I)+= dram_sun4i.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN6I) += dram_sun6i.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN7I) += dram_sun4i.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN8I) += dram_sun8i.o
 -ifdef CONFIG_SPL_FEL
 -obj-y+= start.o
 -endif
 +obj-y+= fel_utils.o
  endif
 diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c 
 b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c
 index 6e28bcd..b7492ac 100644
 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c
 +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c
 @@ -27,6 +27,13 @@

  #include linux/compiler.h

 +struct fel_stash {
 + uint32_t sp;
 + uint32_t lr;
 +};

 struct fel_stash {
 uint32_t sp;
 uint32_t lr;
 uint32_t cpsr;
 uint32_t sctlr;
 uint32_t vbar;
 uint32_t cr;
 };

 +struct fel_stash fel_stash __attribute__((section(.data)));
 +
  static int gpio_init(void)
  {
  #if CONFIG_CONS_INDEX == 1  defined(CONFIG_UART0_PORT_F)
 @@ -65,6 +72,12 @@ static int gpio_init(void)
   return 0;
  }

 +void spl_board_load_image(void)
 +{
 + debug(Returning to FEL sp=%x, lr=%x\n, fel_stash.sp, fel_stash.lr);
 + return_to_fel(fel_stash.sp, fel_stash.lr);
 +}
 +
  void s_init(void)
  {
  #if defined CONFIG_MACH_SUN6I || defined CONFIG_MACH_SUN8I
 @@ -95,6 +108,14 @@ void s_init(void)
   */
  u32 spl_boot_device(void)
  {
 + /*
 +  * Have we been asked to return to the FEL portion of the boot ROM?
 +  * TODO: We need a more robust test here, or bracket this with
 +  * #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_FEL.
 +  */
 + if (fel_stash.lr = 0x  fel_stash.lr

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 3/3] sunxi: Normalise FEL support

2015-02-07 Thread Hans de Goede 

Hi,

On 02/07/2015 06:47 PM, Simon Glass wrote:

Make sunxi's FEL code fit with the normal U-Boot boot sequence instead of
creating its own. There are some #ifdefs required in start.S. Future work
will hopefully remove these.


About the #ifdefs, I would really like to see us move to having 1 unified
loader for sunxi, which means getting rid of them. Even though we do use
a label to return from save_boot_params, save_boot_params could still
use r0 to return stuff, like you did in your previous patch-set, or we
could add a global variable to start.S which lives in .data and gets
initialized with 0, and save_boot_params could optionally save some
skip flags there.

Note this dropping of #ifdefs can wait till after v2015.04, for now this
patch-set should get fel mode working as before which is the goal for
v2015.04.

Regards,

Hans



This series is available at u-boot-dm, branch sunxi-working.

Signed-off-by: Simon Glass s...@chromium.org
---

Changes in v2:
- Adjust for new save_boot_params() API
- Drop patch to change r0 to r2 in start.S
- Add #ifdefs to start.S to deal with FEL
- Use 'Fast Early Loader' as the full name for FEL

  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S  |  5 +-
  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile   |  4 +-
  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c| 21 
  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/config.mk  |  2 -
  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S| 25 +
  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/u-boot-spl-fel.lds | 82 -
  arch/arm/include/asm/arch-sunxi/sys_proto.h | 10 
  board/sunxi/Kconfig | 10 
  include/configs/sunxi-common.h  |  6 +--
  scripts/Makefile.spl|  2 -
  10 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 94 deletions(-)
  create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S
  delete mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/u-boot-spl-fel.lds

diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
index 9b49ece..098a83a 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
@@ -54,7 +54,8 @@ save_boot_params_ret:
   * (OMAP4 spl TEXT_BASE is not 32 byte aligned.
   * Continue to use ROM code vector only in OMAP4 spl)
   */
-#if !(defined(CONFIG_OMAP44XX)  defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD))
+#if !(defined(CONFIG_OMAP44XX)  defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD))  \
+   !defined(CONFIG_SPL_FEL)
/* Set V=0 in CP15 SCTLR register - for VBAR to point to vector */
mrc p15, 0, r0, c1, c0, 0   @ Read CP15 SCTLR Register
bic r0, #CR_V   @ V = 0
@@ -67,7 +68,9 @@ save_boot_params_ret:

/* the mask ROM code should have PLL and others stable */
  #ifndef CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT
+#ifndef CONFIG_SPL_FEL
bl  cpu_init_cp15
+#endif
bl  cpu_init_crit
  #endif

diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile 
b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile
index 48db744..c1b975a 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile
@@ -38,7 +38,5 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN5I)  += dram_sun4i.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN6I)  += dram_sun6i.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN7I)  += dram_sun4i.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN8I)  += dram_sun8i.o
-ifdef CONFIG_SPL_FEL
-obj-y  += start.o
-endif
+obj-y  += fel_utils.o
  endif
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c
index 6e28bcd..b7492ac 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c
@@ -27,6 +27,13 @@

  #include linux/compiler.h

+struct fel_stash {
+   uint32_t sp;
+   uint32_t lr;
+};
+
+struct fel_stash fel_stash __attribute__((section(.data)));
+
  static int gpio_init(void)
  {
  #if CONFIG_CONS_INDEX == 1  defined(CONFIG_UART0_PORT_F)
@@ -65,6 +72,12 @@ static int gpio_init(void)
return 0;
  }

+void spl_board_load_image(void)
+{
+   debug(Returning to FEL sp=%x, lr=%x\n, fel_stash.sp, fel_stash.lr);
+   return_to_fel(fel_stash.sp, fel_stash.lr);
+}
+
  void s_init(void)
  {
  #if defined CONFIG_MACH_SUN6I || defined CONFIG_MACH_SUN8I
@@ -95,6 +108,14 @@ void s_init(void)
   */
  u32 spl_boot_device(void)
  {
+   /*
+* Have we been asked to return to the FEL portion of the boot ROM?
+* TODO: We need a more robust test here, or bracket this with
+* #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_FEL.
+*/
+   if (fel_stash.lr = 0x  fel_stash.lr  0x4000)
+   return BOOT_DEVICE_BOARD;
+
return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1;
  }

diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/config.mk 
b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/config.mk
index 00f5ffc..76ffec9 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/config.mk
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/config.mk
@@ -1,8 +1,6 @@
  # Build a combined spl + u-boot image
  ifdef CONFIG_SPL
  ifndef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD
-ifndef CONFIG_SPL_FEL
  ALL-y += u-boot-sunxi-with-spl.bin
  endif
  endif
-endif
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S 
b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S
new file

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 3/3] sunxi: Normalise FEL support

2015-02-07 Thread Simon Glass 
Hi Hans,

On 7 February 2015 at 10:59, Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com wrote:
 Hi,

 On 02/07/2015 06:47 PM, Simon Glass wrote:

 Make sunxi's FEL code fit with the normal U-Boot boot sequence instead of
 creating its own. There are some #ifdefs required in start.S. Future work
 will hopefully remove these.


 About the #ifdefs, I would really like to see us move to having 1 unified
 loader for sunxi, which means getting rid of them. Even though we do use
 a label to return from save_boot_params, save_boot_params could still
 use r0 to return stuff, like you did in your previous patch-set, or we
 could add a global variable to start.S which lives in .data and gets
 initialized with 0, and save_boot_params could optionally save some
 skip flags there.

 Note this dropping of #ifdefs can wait till after v2015.04, for now this
 patch-set should get fel mode working as before which is the goal for
 v2015.04.

OK. It's just as easy for me to do this now, but Albert was not keen
on doing this at run-time.

So if you can remove the #ifdefs by calling back into the BROM that
would probably be better. For now I think Albert prefers the #ifdefs.

 This series is available at u-boot-dm, branch sunxi-working.

 Signed-off-by: Simon Glass s...@chromium.org
 ---


[snip]

Regards,
Simon
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 3/3] sunxi: Normalise FEL support

2015-02-07 Thread Simon Glass 
Make sunxi's FEL code fit with the normal U-Boot boot sequence instead of
creating its own. There are some #ifdefs required in start.S. Future work
will hopefully remove these.

This series is available at u-boot-dm, branch sunxi-working.

Signed-off-by: Simon Glass s...@chromium.org
---

Changes in v2:
- Adjust for new save_boot_params() API
- Drop patch to change r0 to r2 in start.S
- Add #ifdefs to start.S to deal with FEL
- Use 'Fast Early Loader' as the full name for FEL

 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S  |  5 +-
 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile   |  4 +-
 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c| 21 
 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/config.mk  |  2 -
 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S| 25 +
 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/u-boot-spl-fel.lds | 82 -
 arch/arm/include/asm/arch-sunxi/sys_proto.h | 10 
 board/sunxi/Kconfig | 10 
 include/configs/sunxi-common.h  |  6 +--
 scripts/Makefile.spl|  2 -
 10 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 94 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S
 delete mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/u-boot-spl-fel.lds

diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
index 9b49ece..098a83a 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
@@ -54,7 +54,8 @@ save_boot_params_ret:
  * (OMAP4 spl TEXT_BASE is not 32 byte aligned.
  * Continue to use ROM code vector only in OMAP4 spl)
  */
-#if !(defined(CONFIG_OMAP44XX)  defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD))
+#if !(defined(CONFIG_OMAP44XX)  defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD))  \
+   !defined(CONFIG_SPL_FEL)
/* Set V=0 in CP15 SCTLR register - for VBAR to point to vector */
mrc p15, 0, r0, c1, c0, 0   @ Read CP15 SCTLR Register
bic r0, #CR_V   @ V = 0
@@ -67,7 +68,9 @@ save_boot_params_ret:
 
/* the mask ROM code should have PLL and others stable */
 #ifndef CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT
+#ifndef CONFIG_SPL_FEL
bl  cpu_init_cp15
+#endif
bl  cpu_init_crit
 #endif
 
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile 
b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile
index 48db744..c1b975a 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile
@@ -38,7 +38,5 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN5I)  += dram_sun4i.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN6I)   += dram_sun6i.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN7I)   += dram_sun4i.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN8I)   += dram_sun8i.o
-ifdef CONFIG_SPL_FEL
-obj-y  += start.o
-endif
+obj-y  += fel_utils.o
 endif
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c
index 6e28bcd..b7492ac 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c
@@ -27,6 +27,13 @@
 
 #include linux/compiler.h
 
+struct fel_stash {
+   uint32_t sp;
+   uint32_t lr;
+};
+
+struct fel_stash fel_stash __attribute__((section(.data)));
+
 static int gpio_init(void)
 {
 #if CONFIG_CONS_INDEX == 1  defined(CONFIG_UART0_PORT_F)
@@ -65,6 +72,12 @@ static int gpio_init(void)
return 0;
 }
 
+void spl_board_load_image(void)
+{
+   debug(Returning to FEL sp=%x, lr=%x\n, fel_stash.sp, fel_stash.lr);
+   return_to_fel(fel_stash.sp, fel_stash.lr);
+}
+
 void s_init(void)
 {
 #if defined CONFIG_MACH_SUN6I || defined CONFIG_MACH_SUN8I
@@ -95,6 +108,14 @@ void s_init(void)
  */
 u32 spl_boot_device(void)
 {
+   /*
+* Have we been asked to return to the FEL portion of the boot ROM?
+* TODO: We need a more robust test here, or bracket this with
+* #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_FEL.
+*/
+   if (fel_stash.lr = 0x  fel_stash.lr  0x4000)
+   return BOOT_DEVICE_BOARD;
+
return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1;
 }
 
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/config.mk 
b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/config.mk
index 00f5ffc..76ffec9 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/config.mk
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/config.mk
@@ -1,8 +1,6 @@
 # Build a combined spl + u-boot image
 ifdef CONFIG_SPL
 ifndef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD
-ifndef CONFIG_SPL_FEL
 ALL-y += u-boot-sunxi-with-spl.bin
 endif
 endif
-endif
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S 
b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S
new file mode 100644
index 000..0c1de52
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+/*
+ * Utility functions for FEL mode.
+ *
+ * Copyright (c) 2015 Google, Inc
+ *
+ * SPDX-License-Identifier:GPL-2.0+
+ */
+
+#include asm-offsets.h
+#include config.h
+#include asm/system.h
+#include linux/linkage.h
+
+ENTRY(save_boot_params)
+   ldr r0, =fel_stash
+   str sp, [r0, #0]
+   str lr, [r0, #4]
+   b   save_boot_params_ret
+ENDPROC(save_boot_params)
+
+ENTRY(return_to_fel)
+   mov sp, r0
+   mov lr, r1
+   bx  lr
+ENDPROC(return_to_fel)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/u-boot-spl-fel.lds

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 3/3] sunxi: Normalise FEL support

2015-02-07 Thread Siarhei Siamashka 
On Sat,  7 Feb 2015 10:47:30 -0700
Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:

 Make sunxi's FEL code fit with the normal U-Boot boot sequence instead of
 creating its own. There are some #ifdefs required in start.S. Future work
 will hopefully remove these.
 
 This series is available at u-boot-dm, branch sunxi-working.
 
 Signed-off-by: Simon Glass s...@chromium.org
 ---
 
 Changes in v2:
 - Adjust for new save_boot_params() API
 - Drop patch to change r0 to r2 in start.S
 - Add #ifdefs to start.S to deal with FEL
 - Use 'Fast Early Loader' as the full name for FEL

Thanks for working on these patches. It looks like we are finally
getting really close to resolving the sunxi FEL boot problem.

Some comments are below.

  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S  |  5 +-
  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile   |  4 +-
  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c| 21 
  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/config.mk  |  2 -
  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S| 25 +
  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/u-boot-spl-fel.lds | 82 
 -
  arch/arm/include/asm/arch-sunxi/sys_proto.h | 10 
  board/sunxi/Kconfig | 10 
  include/configs/sunxi-common.h  |  6 +--
  scripts/Makefile.spl|  2 -
  10 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 94 deletions(-)
  create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/fel_utils.S
  delete mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/u-boot-spl-fel.lds
 
 diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
 index 9b49ece..098a83a 100644
 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
 +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
 @@ -54,7 +54,8 @@ save_boot_params_ret:
   * (OMAP4 spl TEXT_BASE is not 32 byte aligned.
   * Continue to use ROM code vector only in OMAP4 spl)
   */
 -#if !(defined(CONFIG_OMAP44XX)  defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD))
 +#if !(defined(CONFIG_OMAP44XX)  defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD))  \
 + !defined(CONFIG_SPL_FEL)

Maybe we can just update the 'save_boot_params' function to save the
important configuration registers and then undo this configuration
in 'return_to_fel'? This allows us to avoid the sunxi specific ifdefs
in the core ARM code.

In this particular case, restoring VBAR and CPSR is important because
the BROM code uses an IRQ handler for FEL (presumably USB related).
And we want to ensure that this IRQ handler works properly again
after resuming the FEL code.

   /* Set V=0 in CP15 SCTLR register - for VBAR to point to vector */
   mrc p15, 0, r0, c1, c0, 0   @ Read CP15 SCTLR Register
   bic r0, #CR_V   @ V = 0
 @@ -67,7 +68,9 @@ save_boot_params_ret:
  
   /* the mask ROM code should have PLL and others stable */
  #ifndef CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT
 +#ifndef CONFIG_SPL_FEL

Same here.

   bl  cpu_init_cp15
 +#endif
   bl  cpu_init_crit
  #endif
  
 diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile 
 b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile
 index 48db744..c1b975a 100644
 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile
 +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/Makefile
 @@ -38,7 +38,5 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN5I)+= dram_sun4i.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN6I) += dram_sun6i.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN7I) += dram_sun4i.o
  obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN8I) += dram_sun8i.o
 -ifdef CONFIG_SPL_FEL
 -obj-y+= start.o
 -endif
 +obj-y+= fel_utils.o
  endif
 diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c 
 b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c
 index 6e28bcd..b7492ac 100644
 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c
 +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c
 @@ -27,6 +27,13 @@
  
  #include linux/compiler.h
  
 +struct fel_stash {
 + uint32_t sp;
 + uint32_t lr;
 +};

struct fel_stash {
uint32_t sp;
uint32_t lr;
uint32_t cpsr;
uint32_t sctlr;
uint32_t vbar;
uint32_t cr;
};

 +struct fel_stash fel_stash __attribute__((section(.data)));
 +
  static int gpio_init(void)
  {
  #if CONFIG_CONS_INDEX == 1  defined(CONFIG_UART0_PORT_F)
 @@ -65,6 +72,12 @@ static int gpio_init(void)
   return 0;
  }
  
 +void spl_board_load_image(void)
 +{
 + debug(Returning to FEL sp=%x, lr=%x\n, fel_stash.sp, fel_stash.lr);
 + return_to_fel(fel_stash.sp, fel_stash.lr);
 +}
 +
  void s_init(void)
  {
  #if defined CONFIG_MACH_SUN6I || defined CONFIG_MACH_SUN8I
 @@ -95,6 +108,14 @@ void s_init(void)
   */
  u32 spl_boot_device(void)
  {
 + /*
 +  * Have we been asked to return to the FEL portion of the boot ROM?
 +  * TODO: We need a more robust test here, or bracket this with
 +  * #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_FEL.
 +  */
 + if (fel_stash.lr = 0x  fel_stash.lr  0x4000)
 + return BOOT_DEVICE_BOARD;
   return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1;

It is probably better to do it this way:

#ifdef CONFIG_SPL_FEL
return BOOT_DEVICE_BOARD;
#else
if (memcmp((void *)4, eGON.BT0, 8) == 0)
return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1;
else
return

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 3/3] sunxi: Normalise FEL support

2015-02-07 Thread Hans de Goede 

Hi,

On 02/07/2015 07:02 PM, Simon Glass wrote:

Hi Hans,

On 7 February 2015 at 10:59, Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com wrote:

Hi,

On 02/07/2015 06:47 PM, Simon Glass wrote:


Make sunxi's FEL code fit with the normal U-Boot boot sequence instead of
creating its own. There are some #ifdefs required in start.S. Future work
will hopefully remove these.



About the #ifdefs, I would really like to see us move to having 1 unified
loader for sunxi, which means getting rid of them. Even though we do use
a label to return from save_boot_params, save_boot_params could still
use r0 to return stuff, like you did in your previous patch-set, or we
could add a global variable to start.S which lives in .data and gets
initialized with 0, and save_boot_params could optionally save some
skip flags there.

Note this dropping of #ifdefs can wait till after v2015.04, for now this
patch-set should get fel mode working as before which is the goal for
v2015.04.


OK. It's just as easy for me to do this now, but Albert was not keen
on doing this at run-time.

So if you can remove the #ifdefs by calling back into the BROM that
would probably be better.


Calling back into the BROm, rather then returning into it means that
usb needs to get re-initialized and the usb-host will see a usb
disconnect / reconnect, which is not really pretty, so I would like
to avoid that, and instead use something like your proposed runtime
checking with flags


For now I think Albert prefers the #ifdefs.


#ifdefs are fine for v2015.04, but for v2015.07 I really believe we
need something runtime so that we can move to one unified loader
for sunxi. Albert can you give us some guidance on how we can best
implement runtime checks like the ones which Simon did with flags
stored in r0 in his initial patch-set ?

Regards,

Hans
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot