arm: imx: cx9020: remove usage of mx53_dram_size
PATCH 1/1 arm: imx: cx9020: remove usage of mx53_dram_size
From: Patrick Bruenn <[email protected]>
Global variables are not available during board_init_f(). 'static uint32_t mx53_dram_size[2];' was used in board specific dram_init(), dram_init_banksize() and get_effective_memsize() to avoid multiple calls to get_ram_size().
However multiple calls are better than undefined behavior... This fixes:
https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2017-November/313214.html
https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2017-December/314480.html
---
mx53cx9020 was based on mx53loco, which still uses this global variable. If you agree, this is a bug, I can prepare a similar fix for the QSB. Maybe it makes sense to move the dram_init functions for both boards into something like boards/freescale/common/mx53_dram.c
But be aware I have no QSB at hand and could only compile test that patch for mx53loco.
--- board/beckhoff/mx53cx9020/mx53cx9020.c | 14 +++++--------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
board/beckhoff/mx53cx9020/mx53cx9020.c +5 -9
@@ -59,8 +59,6 @@ static const u32 CCAT_MODE_RUN = 0x0033DC8F;DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR ; -static uint32_t mx53_dram_size[2 ]; -phys_size_t get_effective_memsize (void ) {/*
@@ -74,15 +72,13 @@ phys_size_t get_effective_memsize(void)* U-Boot into invalid memory area close to the end of the first * DRAM bank. */ -return mx53_dram_size[0 ]; +return get_ram_size ((void *)PHYS_SDRAM_1 ,1 <<30 ); }int dram_init (void ) { - mx53_dram_size[0 ] =get_ram_size ((void *)PHYS_SDRAM_1 ,1 <<30 ); - mx53_dram_size[1 ] =get_ram_size ((void *)PHYS_SDRAM_2 ,1 <<30 ); - - gd->ram_size = mx53_dram_size[0 ] + mx53_dram_size[1 ]; + gd->ram_size =get_ram_size ((void *)PHYS_SDRAM_1 ,1 <<30 ); + gd->ram_size +=get_ram_size ((void *)PHYS_SDRAM_2 ,1 <<30 );return 0 ; }
@@ -90,10 +86,10 @@ int dram_init(void)int dram_init_banksize (void ) { gd->bd->bi_dram[0 ].start =PHYS_SDRAM_1 ; - gd->bd->bi_dram[0 ].size = mx53_dram_size[0 ]; + gd->bd->bi_dram[0 ].size =get_ram_size ((void *)PHYS_SDRAM_1 ,1 <<30 ); gd->bd->bi_dram[1 ].start =PHYS_SDRAM_2 ; - gd->bd->bi_dram[1 ].size = mx53_dram_size[1 ]; + gd->bd->bi_dram[1 ].size =get_ram_size ((void *)PHYS_SDRAM_2 ,1 <<30 );return 0 ; }
Signature · 1 line
2.11.0
PATCH 1/1 arm: imx: cx9020: remove usage of mx53_dram_size
Hi,
Quoted 4 lines · On Fri, 15 Dec 2017 13:56:15 +0100 linux-kernel-dev at beckhoff.com wrote:
From: Patrick Bruenn <[email protected]>
Global variables are not available during
board_init_f().
s/Global/static/
Lothar Waßmann
PATCH 1/1 arm: imx: cx9020: remove usage of mx53_dram_size
Hi Lothar,
Quoted 12 lines
From: Lothar Waßmann [mailto:LW at KARO-electronics.de]
Sent: Freitag, 15. Dezember 2017 15:02Hi,
Quoted 4 lines · On Fri, 15 Dec 2017 13:56:15 +0100 linux-kernel-dev at beckhoff.com wrote:
From: Patrick Bruenn <[email protected]>
Global variables are not available during
board_init_f().s/Global/static/
I fixed that for v2. Unfortunately everywhere but in the cover letter :-(.
Beckhoff Automation GmbH & Co. KG | Managing Director: Dipl. Phys. Hans Beckhoff Registered office: Verl, Germany | Register court: Guetersloh HRA 7075
PATCH 1/1 arm: imx: cx9020: remove usage of mx53_dram_size
In reply to linux-kernel-dev at beckhoff.comHi Patrick,
Quoted 14 lines · On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:56 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Patrick Bruenn <[email protected]>
Global variables are not available during
board_init_f(). 'staticuint32_tmx53_dram_size[2];' was used in board specificdram_init(),dram_init_banksize()andget_effective_memsize()to avoid multiple calls toget_ram_size().However multiple calls are better than undefined behavior... This fixes:
https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2017-November/313214.html
https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2017-December/314480.htmlSigned-off-by Patrick Bruenn <[email protected]>
Quoted 8 lines
---
mx53cx9020 was based on mx53loco, which still uses this global variable. If you agree, this is a bug, I can prepare a similar fix for the QSB. Maybe it makes sense to move the
dram_initfunctions for both boards into something likeboards/freescale/common/mx53_dram.c
But be aware I have no QSB at hand and could only compile test that patch for mx53loco.
Yes, it makes sense to fix all boards. board/aries/m53evk/m53evk.c would also be affected.
Please prepare a patch that fixes all of them.
Thanks!