Hi Kever, On 11 September 2017 at 02:17, Kever Yang <kever.y...@rock-chips.com> wrote: > Hi Simon, > > > On 09/08/2017 08:17 PM, Simon Glass wrote: >> >> Hi Kever, >> >> On 8 September 2017 at 01:34, Dr. Philipp Tomsich >> <philipp.toms...@theobroma-systems.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On 8 Sep 2017, at 04:46, Kever Yang <kever.y...@rock-chips.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Philipp, >>>> >>>> We already enable CONFIG_SPL_OF_CONTROL for all rk3399 board, right? >>> >>> I meant “full OF_CONTROL” as opposed to “OF_PLATDATA” (which is dependent >>> of OF_CONTROL, but is intended as a stopgap measure). >>> >>>> For OF_PLATDATA, I would prefer there always have a option to use >>>> for >>>> speed up the boot time, not only for ram size. >>> >>> I had discussed that with Simon recently and he views OF_PLATDATA as a >>> last >>> resort to be used, when there is not enough memory for full OF_CONTROL. >> >> >> Can you use bootstage to measure the boot time impact? > > > I think I have do the statistics before with the timer instead of bootstage. > And here is the result I got with bootstage(with little change in spl to > move > secure_timer_init() before spl_early_init()): > > The mark of end_spl: > With of-pladata: > 205952 205864 205857 > without of-platdata: > 279520 279495 279508
> The difference is about 75ms. That is enough to justify using of-platdata here. I am not sure why the difference is so large though. > > BTW: > bug1: there is no timer_get_boot_us() in armv8, > bug2: there is something wrong with "dm_spl", it use bootstage_start() + > bootstage_accum() > instead of bootstage_mark_name(), the "board_init_f" will replace > it, maybe some tag is > not correct. OK. Do you think you could send patches to fix these? Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
