Hi Jamie, On Mon, Dec 08, 2025 at 12:10:28PM +0000, [email protected] wrote: > [EXTERNAL MAIL] > > Hi Leo, > > On Thu, 2025-12-04 at 15:45 +0800, Leo Liang wrote: > > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know > > the content is safe > > > > Hi Jamie, > > > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 12:38:42PM +0000, Jamie Gibbons wrote: > > > [EXTERNAL MAIL] > > > > > > From: Conor Dooley <[email protected]> > > > > > > PolarFire SoC needs a custom implementation of top_of_ram(), so stop > > > using the generic CPU & create a custom CPU instead. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > arch/riscv/Kconfig | 1 + > > > arch/riscv/cpu/mpfs/Kconfig | 16 +++++++++++ > > > arch/riscv/cpu/mpfs/Makefile | 6 ++++ > > > arch/riscv/cpu/mpfs/cpu.c | 22 +++++++++++++++ > > > arch/riscv/cpu/mpfs/dram.c | 38 > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > arch/riscv/include/asm/arch-mpfs/clk.h | 8 ++++++ > > > board/microchip/mpfs_generic/Kconfig | 4 +-- > > > 7 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > create mode 100644 arch/riscv/cpu/mpfs/Kconfig > > > create mode 100644 arch/riscv/cpu/mpfs/Makefile > > > create mode 100644 arch/riscv/cpu/mpfs/cpu.c > > > > The cpu.c file only contains "cleanup_before_linux" and seems > > identical > > with the one provided in arch/riscv/cpu/generic/cpu.c. > > > > Other than that, LGTM. > > > > If you don't mind, I could fix this on my side that you don't need to > > resend the patchset again. > > > > Reviewed-by: Leo Yu-Chi Liang <[email protected]> > > Thank you for your response, review and feedback. > > Regarding 'mpfs/cpu.c', you're corect that it is currently identical to > the generic implementation. Our intent was to provide a placeholder for > any future Polarfire-specific logic and also assumed it was manditory, > but if duplication is unneccessary, I'm happy for you to adjust as you > see fit. > > In other words, if U-Boot prefers to avoid duplication and this file is > not mandatory for build or architextural reasons per CPU implementation, > than please go ahead and use the generic version.
Got it! Thanks for the explanation. I’ve updated it to use the generic implementation. If any Polarfire-specific logic is needed in the future, we can add this file back at that time. Best regards, Leo > > Thanks, > Jamie. >
