On 11/22/2016 02:25 PM, Alison Wang wrote: > > 2016년 11월 16일 (수) 19:44, Alison Wang > <alison.w...@nxp.com<mailto:alison.w...@nxp.com>>님이 작성: > Hi, Thomas, > > I didn't see your patch. Maybe it isn't CC'ing me. Could you send me and york > the link? > > Minkyu Kang, > > Could you add review-by and assign this patch > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/667948/ to York? So he can merge this patch > and Thomas's patch together. > > It's OK. > York means yorksun? > [Alison Wang] Yes. > > Reviewed-by: Minkyu Kang <mk7.k...@samsung.com<mailto:mk7.k...@samsung.com>>
What's this? Minkyu has sent the Reviewed-by tags? I didn't see his reviewed-by tags.. Best Regards, Jaehoon Chung > > Thanks, > Minkyu Kang. > > Thanks. > > > Best Regards, > Alison Wang > > >>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 1:03 PM, Alison Wang >>> <alison.w...@nxp.com<mailto:alison.w...@nxp.com>> >>> wrote: >>>> Hi, Thomas, Alex and York, >>>> >>>> Before there are some discussions about this patch, could we make a >>> solution now? Or else, the patches about [PATCH v8 0/3] armv8: >> Support >>> loading 32-bit OS in AArch32 execution state can't be merged, as the >>> compiling will fail without this patch. >>>> >>>> Thomas, is ARMV8_MULTIENTRY enabled on Exynos7420 now? If not, is >>> there a good way to enable ARMV8_MULTIENTRY on Exynos7420 now? >>> >>> It is not yet enabled. I will post the ARMV8_MULTIENTRY enable patch >>> for Exynos7420 later today. Alternatively, you could include the >> patch >>> listed in the previous email in your series. >>> >> [Alison Wang] Thanks for your reply. I think it's better to send the >> patch by you (the maintainer). Please send it later today. :) >> >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> Best Regards, >>>> Alison Wang >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Thomas Abraham >>>>> [mailto:ta.oma...@gmail.com<mailto:ta.oma...@gmail.com>] >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 4:45 PM >>>>> To: Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de<mailto:ag...@suse.de>> >>>>> Cc: Alison Wang <b18...@freescale.com<mailto:b18...@freescale.com>>; >>>>> thomas...@samsung.com<mailto:thomas...@samsung.com>; >>> Minkyu >>>>> Kang <mk7.k...@samsung.com<mailto:mk7.k...@samsung.com>>; york sun >>>>> <york....@nxp.com<mailto:york....@nxp.com>>; U-Boot >>>>> Mailing List <u-boot@lists.denx.de<mailto:u-boot@lists.denx.de>>; Jason >>>>> Jin <jason....@nxp.com<mailto:jason....@nxp.com>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: exynos: Use the generic >>>>> lowlevel_init instead of the specific one >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Alexander Graf >>>>> <ag...@suse.de<mailto:ag...@suse.de>> >>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 20.09.16 08:25, Thomas Abraham wrote: >>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Alexander Graf >>>>>>> <ag...@suse.de<mailto:ag...@suse.de>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Am 20.09.2016 um 07:51 schrieb Thomas Abraham >>> <ta.oma...@gmail.com<mailto:ta.oma...@gmail.com>>: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Alison, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Alexander Graf >>>>>>>> <ag...@suse.de<mailto:ag...@suse.de>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 09.09.16 10:48, Alison Wang wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This patch is to use the the generic lowlevel_init instead of >>> the >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> specific one. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Alison Wang >>>>>>>> <alison.w...@nxp.com<mailto:alison.w...@nxp.com>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If I had to guess, I'd think they only had their own version >>>>> because the >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> old one required a GIC. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I apologize for the delay. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The reason for using a custom version was to avoid enabling >>>>>>>> ARMV8_MULTIENTRY config option since the Exynos7 code was >> ready >>> for >>>>>>>> it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Either way, since Samsung doesn't reply, I'm fine potentially >>>>> breaking >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> their boards if that means that we can make progress for >>> actively >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> maintained ones: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de<mailto:ag...@suse.de>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This patch without the ARMV8_MULTIENTRY and >> ARMV8_SWITCH_TO_EL1 >>>>> config >>>>>>>> options does not switch the boot CPU from EL3 to EL1. So it >>> would >>>>> be >>>>>>>> preferable to not merge this patch until ARMV8_MULTIENTRY is >>>>> enabled >>>>>>>> for Exynos7. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Why do you want to switch it to EL1 in the first place? Linux >>>>>>>> is >>>>> very happy >>>>>>>> to live in EL2 - which is what we call it in by default. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Okay, there is no particular requirement to be in EL1 for >> Exynos7. >>>>> EL2 >>>>>>> would also be fine. But Exynos7 support in u-boot is not yet >>> ready >>>>> for >>>>>>> enabling ARMV8_MULTIENTRY config option. Is there anything be >>>>> blocked >>>>>>> due to Exynos7 using a custom lowlevel_init function? >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, we're changing the semantics of armv8_switch_to_el2 and >>>>>> armv8_switch_to_el1: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2016-September/266217.html >>>>>> >>>>>> which is a prerequisite for AArch32 kernel boot on AArch64 >> systems. >>>>> >>>>> Okay. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> How quickly do you think you could make Exynos7 work with >>> MULTIENTRY? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Exynos7420 uses CPU 0 of Cluster 1 as boot CPU (master CPU). The >>> macro >>>>> 'branch_if_master' requires all affinity values to be zero for a >>>>> CPU to be identified as a master CPU. And so the boot CPU is >>>>> incorrectly detected as a slave CPU. I have tested with the >>>>> following temporary workaround to enable ARMV8_MULTIENTRY on >>>>> Exynos7420. If it looks >>> fine, >>>>> this can be merged along with Alison's patch. >>>>> >>>>> Thomas. >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach- >>>>> exynos/Kconfig index ce2a16f..45c5eeb 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig >>>>> @@ -126,6 +126,8 @@ choice >>>>> config TARGET_ESPRESSO7420 >>>>> bool "ESPRESSO7420 board" >>>>> select ARM64 >>>>> + select ARMV8_MULTIENTRY >>>>> + select ARMV8_SWITCH_TO_EL1 >>>>> select SUPPORT_SPL >>>>> select OF_CONTROL >>>>> select SPL_DISABLE_OF_CONTROL diff --git >>>>> a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/soc.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/soc.c index >>>>> f9c7468..6c3ebb0 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/soc.c >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/soc.c >>>>> @@ -9,6 +9,16 @@ >>>>> #include <asm/io.h> >>>>> #include <asm/system.h> >>>>> >>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_TARGET_ESPRESSO7420 >>>>> +/* >>>>> + * Exynos7420 uses CPU0 of Cluster-1 as boot CPU. Due to this >>>>> branch_if_master >>>>> + * fails to identify as the master CPU. As temporary workaround, >>> setup >>>>> the >>>>> + * slave CPU boot address as "_main". >>>>> + */ >>>>> +extern void _main(void); >>>>> +void *secondary_boot_addr = (void *)_main; #endif /* >>>>> +CONFIG_TARGET_ESPRESSO7420 */ >>>>> + >>>>> void reset_cpu(ulong addr) >>>>> { >>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_V7 >>>>> diff --git a/include/configs/exynos7420-common.h >>>>> b/include/configs/exynos7420-common.h >>>>> index 9e03962..6f58aef 100644 >>>>> --- a/include/configs/exynos7420-common.h >>>>> +++ b/include/configs/exynos7420-common.h >>>>> @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ >>>>> #define CONFIG_IRAM_BASE 0x02100000 >>>>> #define CONFIG_IRAM_SIZE 0x58000 >>>>> #define CONFIG_IRAM_END (CONFIG_IRAM_BASE >> + >>>>> CONFIG_IRAM_SIZE) >>>>> +#define CPU_RELEASE_ADDR secondary_boot_addr >>>>> >>>>> /* Number of CPUs available */ >>>>> #define CONFIG_CORE_COUNT 0x8 >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Alex > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot@lists.denx.de<mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> > http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot@lists.denx.de > http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot > _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot