Hi Kevin, >Akshay Saraswat <[email protected]> writes: > >[...] > >> I don't think it hurts to have a generic function with ARM errata >> workaround implementation. Whoever wish to use it can call it in their >> boot path. And it's not even getting executed right now for any SoC >> other than Exynos542x, so those who don't want it need not bother >> about it. This was the intention. :) > >What about exynos542x platforms which also have secure firmware? Are >you testing this on any of those (e.g. exynos5422-odroid-xu3?)
No, I have not tested this series on exynos5422-odroid-xu3 becuase I don't have it. :) Probably those who are working on exynos5422-odroid-xu3 should comment. I don't know anything about exynos5422-odroid-xu3 and don't have related documents. But as far as I know, from my past experience, for all such features (SMC calls, secondary cores boot path and configuration), there should be a different secure firmware which may not be U-Boot. If true, this whole series of patches would be useless and CONFIG_EXYNOS5420 should not be defined for such a SoC. > >Kevin Regards, Akshay Saraswat _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
