On 08/07/2017 10:16 AM, Chee, Tien Fong wrote:
> On Isn, 2017-07-31 at 12:55 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 07/31/2017 12:50 PM, tien.fong.c...@intel.com wrote:
>>> From: Tien Fong Chee <tien.fong.c...@intel.com>
>>> Configuration flip-flop driver is mainly used for handling the FPGA
>>> program
>>> operation where the FPGA image loading from the flash into FPGA
>>> manager.
>>> Signed-off-by: Tien Fong Chee <tien.fong.c...@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>  arch/arm/mach-socfpga/cff.c              |  581
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  arch/arm/mach-socfpga/include/mach/cff.h |   40 ++
>>>  include/configs/socfpga_arria10_socdk.h  |    6 +
>>>  3 files changed, 627 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>  create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-socfpga/cff.c
>>>  create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-socfpga/include/mach/cff.h
>> Same comment as to previous patch, there is already support for
>> loading
>> FPGA from storage used by Xilinx, improve on that.
> Hi Marek,
> After i going through the xilinx codes, i found that we are sharing
> similar fpga framework design. The only different are the way of
> decoding fpga design and loading from flash to fpga. So this would be
> handled in cff.c, as for xilinx if i am not mistaken
> is drivers/fpga/zynqpl.c. I think appropiate location for cff.c should
> be in arch/mach-socfpga because this is not fpga driver, this is more
> like platform specific algorithm mechanism to handle fpga decoding and
> loading from flash to fpga. For the U-boot console command fpga loafs,
> which will wrap the cff.c and acting as upper layer driver for  user
> console interface. I plan to enhance this after having a complete boot
> from sdmmc, qspi and nand because this require considering a lot use
> case scenarios, and some workaround on PLL clock glitch issue. You know
> our DDR IOs is part of the fpga periph rbf, simply calling fpga loadfs
> to reconfigure fpga can corrupt the DDR IOs configuration, and board
> may hang if it is not handle properly, so i need a workable complete
> boot to console environment for testing out the enhancement.
> Let me know what you think about this patchset, and can i continue
> process with this patchset?

I think cff.c is not even needed. Otherwise, submit patches and we'll
see how that looks.

Best regards,
Marek Vasut
U-Boot mailing list

Reply via email to