Hi Albert, On 09/23/2013 04:37 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > Hi Michal, > > On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:19:52 +0200, Michal Simek <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On 09/23/2013 02:31 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: >>> Hi Michal, >>> >>> On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:52:02 +0200, Michal Simek >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Zynq lowlevel_init() was implemented in C but stack >>>> pointer is setup after function call in _main(). >>>> Move architecture setup to arch_cpu_init() which is call >>>> as the first function in board_init_f() which >>>> already have correct stack pointer. >>>> >>>> Reported-by: Sven Schwermer <[email protected]> >>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <[email protected]> >>>> --- >>>> I can't see any problem to call zynq setup a little >>>> bit later. There is already expectation that u-boot >>>> runs from DDR. >>>> Moving lowlevel_init from C to ASM is possible but >>>> I will have to introduce new macros with hardcoded >>>> values. Using structures is much nicer. >>>> >>>> --- >>>> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/cpu.c | 6 ++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/cpu.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/cpu.c >>>> index 4367d1a..8846f30 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/cpu.c >>>> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/cpu.c >>>> @@ -11,6 +11,10 @@ >>>> >>>> void lowlevel_init(void) >>>> { >>>> +} >>> >>> I'd rather you deleted lowlevel_init() as a C function with this >>> name should not exist. >> >> Ok. Do you want me to create almost empty low_level.S or just use >> arch/arm/cpu/arvm7/lowlevel_init.S and define empty s_init()? > > Urgh. I realize removing the C function would give you more work than > simply keeping it empty until the whole s_init() mess is cleaned up. :( > > I'll take your change as-is, sorry for the noise.
In connection to this topic we have recently found one issue
regarding to neon instruction which u-boot uses.
We have this code to enable them in asm and adding this to lowlevel_init.S
is straight way how to do so.
mov r0, r0
mrc p15, 0, r1, c1, c0, 2
orr r1, r1, #(0xf << 20)
mcr p15, 0, r1, c1, c0, 2
fmrx r1, FPEXC
orr r1,r1, #(1<<30)
fmxr FPEXC, r1
Is it ok to create zynq asm specific lowlevel function
or doing this through s_init() or you have nice a clean way how
this should be solved when you are saying that s_init() is mess.
Thanks,
Michal
--
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng), OpenPGP -> KeyID: FE3D1F91
w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854
Maintainer of Linux kernel - Microblaze cpu - http://www.monstr.eu/fdt/
Maintainer of Linux kernel - Xilinx Zynq ARM architecture
Microblaze U-BOOT custodian and responsible for u-boot arm zynq platform
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
