On 1 February 2018 at 05:26, Michal Simek <[email protected]> wrote: > On 31.1.2018 22:25, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: >> On 26 January 2018 at 09:33, Michal Simek <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> On 17.1.2018 14:56, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: >>>> This commit adds CPU and silicon version information >>>> consuming the SLCR IDCODE and DEVCFG MCTRL registers, >>>> respectively. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Ariel D'Alessandro <[email protected]> >>>> Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <[email protected]> >>>> --- >>>> arch/arm/mach-zynq/cpu.c | 46 >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 46 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-zynq/cpu.c b/arch/arm/mach-zynq/cpu.c >>>> index 53a07b0059c2..602f483c162b 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-zynq/cpu.c >>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-zynq/cpu.c >>>> @@ -35,6 +35,25 @@ static const struct { >>>> }; >>>> #endif >>>> >>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_DISPLAY_CPUINFO >>>> +static const struct { >>>> + u8 idcode; >>>> + const char *cpuinfo; >>>> +} zynq_cpu_info[] = { >>>> + { .idcode = XILINX_ZYNQ_7007S, .cpuinfo = XILINX_XC7Z007S_NAME }, >>>> + { .idcode = XILINX_ZYNQ_7010, .cpuinfo = XILINX_XC7Z010_NAME }, >>>> + { .idcode = XILINX_ZYNQ_7012S, .cpuinfo = XILINX_XC7Z012S_NAME }, >>>> + { .idcode = XILINX_ZYNQ_7014S, .cpuinfo = XILINX_XC7Z014S_NAME }, >>>> + { .idcode = XILINX_ZYNQ_7015, .cpuinfo = XILINX_XC7Z015_NAME }, >>>> + { .idcode = XILINX_ZYNQ_7020, .cpuinfo = XILINX_XC7Z020_NAME }, >>>> + { .idcode = XILINX_ZYNQ_7030, .cpuinfo = XILINX_XC7Z030_NAME }, >>>> + { .idcode = XILINX_ZYNQ_7035, .cpuinfo = XILINX_XC7Z035_NAME }, >>>> + { .idcode = XILINX_ZYNQ_7045, .cpuinfo = XILINX_XC7Z045_NAME }, >>>> + { .idcode = XILINX_ZYNQ_7100, .cpuinfo = XILINX_XC7Z100_NAME }, >>>> + { /* Sentinel */ }, >>> >>> This table pretty much reflect what it is in 2/5. >>> >>> static const struct { >>> u8 idcode; >>> const char *cpuinfo; /* or better name devicename */ >>> u32 fpga_size; >>> } zynq_cpu_info[] = { >>> >>> From xilinx_desc I think size is unused but we can keep in filled and >>> cookie is also not used and can be 0. The rest of data for xilinx_desc >>> is static anyway. >>> >>> It means doing this properly will be the best to fill that xilinx_desc >>> and also it doesn't make sense to call zynq_slcr_get_idcode() twice. >>> It should be enough to detect chip once and fill pointer to actual >>> configuration. And then when fpga should be add then use them. The same >>> for cpuinfo. Link is already setup and you can just use it. >>> >> >> So you propose to have just one table instead of two >> zynq_cpu_info and zynq_fpga_descs ? > > I was playing with it last Friday and I have sent that 2 patches as RFC. >
I see. >> I guess that'll work and might result in simpler code. >> On the other side, the reason I kept them separate >> is because each of them are compiled-in via different >> compile-time options. >> >> Having a single table will mean playing nasty ifdef >> games, which usually mean trouble. >> >> Regarding calling zynq_slcr_get_idcode twice, >> is it really that bad? > > It is not that bad. It is probably better than having global variable. > > Take a look at that RFC. Buildman is also showing pretty nice size > reduction but there are still some pieces which can be done better. > It is based on your code that's why fell free to rework it. > Indeed, it doesn't look bad at all. Let me try those patches, see how they work. -- Ezequiel García, VanguardiaSur www.vanguardiasur.com.ar _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
