Changes to move hawkboard to the new infrastructure.

This patch moves hawkboard to the new spl infrastructure from the older nand_spl one. Making this change required some code refactoring with a couple of davinci based platforms which use spl.

Removed the hawkboard_nand_config build option -- The spl code now gets compiled with hawkboard_config, after building the main u-boot image, using the CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE. Modified the README.hawkboard to reflect the same.

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile +0 -0

@@ -38,8 +38,11 @@ COBJS-$(CONFIG_DRIVER_TI_EMAC)	+= lxt972.o dp83848.o et1011c.o ksz8873.o
 

On 01/09/2012 11:28 AM, Sughosh Ganu wrote:

Quoted 4 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile +0 -0

@@ -38,8 +38,11 @@ COBJS-$(CONFIG_DRIVER_TI_EMAC)	+= lxt972.o dp83848.o et1011c.o ksz8873.o
 

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile COBJS-$(CONFIG_DRIVER_TI_EMAC) += lxt972.o dp83848.o et1011c.o ksz8873.o · line 46

Quoted 10 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile +5 -2

 ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD
 COBJS-y	+= spl.o
-COBJS-$(CONFIG_SOC_DM365)	+= dm365_lowlevel.o
-COBJS-$(CONFIG_SOC_DA8XX)	+= da850_lowlevel.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_DM365_SPL)	+= dm365_lowlevel.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_DM365_SPL)	+= dm365_spl.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_DA850EVM_SPL)	+= da850_lowlevel.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_DA850EVM_SPL)	+= da850_spl.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_HAWKBOARD_SPL)	+= hawkboard_nand_spl.o
 endif

CONFIG_SPL_BUILD means we'll only do this on the SPL build, not the normal build, and we already have symbols for the board and the SoC so we shouldn't need any new CONFIG symbols here, I'm pretty sure.

Quoted 1 line · Tom Rini

On 01/09/2012 11:28 AM, Sughosh Ganu wrote:

<snip>

Quoted 3 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile COBJS-$(CONFIG_DRIVER_TI_EMAC) += lxt972.o

Quoted 3 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile +0 -0

@@ -38,8 +38,11 @@ COBJS-$(CONFIG_DRIVER_TI_EMAC)   += lxt972.o

Quoted 15 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile COBJS-$(CONFIG_DRIVER_TI_EMAC) += lxt972.o dp83848.o et1011c.o ksz8873.o · line 46

Quoted 11 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile +5 -2

 ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD
 COBJS-y    += spl.o
-COBJS-$(CONFIG_SOC_DM365)  += dm365_lowlevel.o
-COBJS-$(CONFIG_SOC_DA8XX)  += da850_lowlevel.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_DM365_SPL)  += dm365_lowlevel.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_DM365_SPL)  += dm365_spl.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_DA850EVM_SPL)       += da850_lowlevel.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_DA850EVM_SPL)       += da850_spl.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_HAWKBOARD_SPL)      += hawkboard_nand_spl.o
 endif

CONFIG_SPL_BUILD means we'll only do this on the SPL build, not the normal build, and we already have symbols for the board and the SoC so we shouldn't need any new CONFIG symbols here, I'm pretty sure.

The problem here is that both da850evm and hawkboard define the CONFIG_SOC_DA850, and CONFIG_SOC_DA8XX, as the hawkboard shares code like pinmux with the da850.

I see a CONFIG_MACH_DAVINCI_* like define in da850evm.h and hawkboard.h. Should i add a similar define for cam_enc_4xx, and use these instead.

Hi Sughosh and Tom,

Quoted 8 lines · Sughosh Ganu

Quoted 1 line · Tom Rini

On 01/09/2012 11:28 AM, Sughosh Ganu wrote:

<snip>

Quoted 3 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile COBJS-$(CONFIG_DRIVER_TI_EMAC) += lxt972.o

Quoted 3 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile +0 -0

@@ -38,8 +38,11 @@ COBJS-$(CONFIG_DRIVER_TI_EMAC)   += lxt972.o

dp83848.o et1011c.o ksz8873.o

Quoted 20 lines

Quoted 15 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile COBJS-$(CONFIG_DRIVER_TI_EMAC) += lxt972.o dp83848.o et1011c.o ksz8873.o · line 46

Quoted 11 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile +5 -2

 ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD
 COBJS-y    += spl.o
-COBJS-$(CONFIG_SOC_DM365)  += dm365_lowlevel.o
-COBJS-$(CONFIG_SOC_DA8XX)  += da850_lowlevel.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_DM365_SPL)  += dm365_lowlevel.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_DM365_SPL)  += dm365_spl.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_DA850EVM_SPL)       += da850_lowlevel.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_DA850EVM_SPL)       += da850_spl.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_HAWKBOARD_SPL)      += hawkboard_nand_spl.o
 endif

CONFIG_SPL_BUILD means we'll only do this on the SPL build, not the normal build, and we already have symbols for the board and the SoC so we shouldn't need any new CONFIG symbols here, I'm pretty sure.

The problem here is that both da850evm and hawkboard define the CONFIG_SOC_DA850, and CONFIG_SOC_DA8XX, as the hawkboard shares code like pinmux with the da850.

Quoted 3 lines

I see a CONFIG_MACH_DAVINCI_* like define in da850evm.h and hawkboard.h. Should i add a similar define for cam_enc_4xx, and use these instead.

Actually the problem is that now we have a board specific file (hawkboard_nand_spl.c) in the arch tree. Hawkboard has a DA850 SoC so if we have a da850_spl.c hawkboard should either use it as well, or we make the *spl.c files board specific and put them into the board tree.

hi Christian,

Quoted 28 lines · Christian Riesch

Hi Sughosh and Tom,

Quoted 7 lines · Sughosh Ganu

Quoted 1 line · Tom Rini

On 01/09/2012 11:28 AM, Sughosh Ganu wrote:

<snip>

Quoted 3 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile COBJS-$(CONFIG_DRIVER_TI_EMAC) += lxt972.o

Quoted 3 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile +0 -0

@@ -38,8 +38,11 @@ COBJS-$(CONFIG_DRIVER_TI_EMAC)   += lxt972.o

dp83848.o et1011c.o ksz8873.o

Quoted 17 lines

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 5 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile +1 -2

 ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD
 COBJS-y    += spl.o
-COBJS-$(CONFIG_SOC_DM365)  += dm365_lowlevel.o
-COBJS-$(CONFIG_SOC_DA8XX)  += da850_lowlevel.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_DM365_SPL)  += dm365_lowlevel.o

Quoted 8 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile COBJS-$(CONFIG_DRIVER_TI_EMAC) += lxt972.o dp83848.o et1011c.o ksz8873.o · line 46

Quoted 5 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/Makefile +4 -0

+COBJS-$(CONFIG_DM365_SPL)  += dm365_spl.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_DA850EVM_SPL)       += da850_lowlevel.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_DA850EVM_SPL)       += da850_spl.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_HAWKBOARD_SPL)      += hawkboard_nand_spl.o
 endif

CONFIG_SPL_BUILD means we'll only do this on the SPL build, not the normal build, and we already have symbols for the board and the SoC so we shouldn't need any new CONFIG symbols here, I'm pretty sure.

The problem here is that both da850evm and hawkboard define the CONFIG_SOC_DA850, and CONFIG_SOC_DA8XX, as the hawkboard shares code like pinmux with the da850.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 3 lines

I see a CONFIG_MACH_DAVINCI_* like define in da850evm.h and hawkboard.h. Should i add a similar define for cam_enc_4xx, and use these instead.

Actually the problem is that now we have a board specific file (hawkboard_nand_spl.c) in the arch tree. Hawkboard has a DA850 SoC so if we have a da850_spl.c hawkboard should either use it as well, or we make the *spl.c files board specific and put them into the board tree.

I'd vote for moving the *spl.c files to their corresponding board directories -- infact hawkboard_nand_spl.c was earlier under it's board directory. This i think keeps the implementation clean, avoids the risk of breakage, and also makes it simpler for any newer board in the same soc family migrating to spl, which i think might increase the ifdeffery.

Hello Sughosh, Christian, Tom,

Quoted 8 lines · Sughosh Ganu

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 3 lines

I see a CONFIG_MACH_DAVINCI_* like define in da850evm.h and hawkboard.h. Should i add a similar define for cam_enc_4xx, and use these instead.

Actually the problem is that now we have a board specific file (hawkboard_nand_spl.c) in the arch tree. Hawkboard has a DA850 SoC so if we have a da850_spl.c hawkboard should either use it as well, or we make the *spl.c files board specific and put them into the board tree.

Quoted 6 lines

I'd vote for moving the *spl.c files to their corresponding board directories -- infact hawkboard_nand_spl.c was earlier under it's board directory. This i think keeps the implementation clean, avoids the risk of breakage, and also makes it simpler for any newer board in the same soc family migrating to spl, which i think might increase the ifdeffery.

Hmm.. I vote against creating board specific files. I am here in line with Christians proposal, posted here:

http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2012-January/115166.html

Did this work for the hawkboard? If you do not need some inits, maybe we add here defines or better make this functions weak, and you can write board specific functions for this parts. The code in board_init_r() is only a "selection" from where to load u-boot, which I think in the long term could be made more common for other SoCs too ... so I want to prevent to split this in board specific files.

This patch moves hawkboard to the new spl infrastructure from the older nand_spl one.

Removed the hawkboard_nand_config build option -- The spl code now gets compiled with hawkboard_config, after building the main u-boot image, using the CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE. Modified the README.hawkboard to reflect the same.

Signed-off-by Sughosh Ganu <[email protected]>

Cc Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Christian Riesch <[email protected]>

Cc Sudhakar Rajashekhara <[email protected]>

Cc Tom Rini <[email protected]>

---

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +1 -4

 void da850_waitloop(unsigned long loopcnt)
 {
 	unsigned long	i;

@@ -235,6 +236,7 @@ int da850_ddr_setup(void)
 
 	return 0;
 }
+#endif /* CONFIG_MACH_DAVINCI_HAWK */
 
 __attribute__((weak))
 void board_gpio_init(void)

@@ -242,10 +244,6 @@ void board_gpio_init(void)
 	return;
 }
 
-/* pinmux_resource[] vector is defined in the board specific file */
-extern const struct pinmux_resource pinmuxes[];
-extern const int pinmuxes_size;
-
 int arch_cpu_init(void)
 {
 	/* Unlock kick registers */

include/configs/hawkboard.h +7 -1

index 12acb27..57b1932 100644
@@ -43,12 +43,30 @@
 #define CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT
 #define CONFIG_BOARD_EARLY_INIT_F
 
-#if defined(CONFIG_NAND_U_BOOT) || defined(CONFIG_UART_U_BOOT)
+#define CONFIG_SYS_DA850_SYSCFG_SUSPSRC (	\
+	DAVINCI_SYSCFG_SUSPSRC_EMAC |		\
+	DAVINCI_SYSCFG_SUSPSRC_I2C  |		\
+	DAVINCI_SYSCFG_SUSPSRC_SPI1 |		\
+	DAVINCI_SYSCFG_SUSPSRC_TIMER0 |		\
+	DAVINCI_SYSCFG_SUSPSRC_UART2)
+

include/configs/hawkboard.h +8 -0

+#define CONFIG_SPL_NAND_SUPPORT
+#define CONFIG_SPL_NAND_SIMPLE
+#define CONFIG_SPL_NAND_LOAD
+#define CONFIG_SPL_SERIAL_SUPPORT
+#define CONFIG_SPL_LDSCRIPT		"board/$(BOARDDIR)/u-boot-spl-hawk.lds"
+#define CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE		0xc1080000
+#define CONFIG_SPL_STACK		CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR
+
 /*
  * Memory Info
  */

Hello Sughosh,

Quoted 15 lines · Sughosh Ganu

This patch moves hawkboard to the new spl infrastructure from the older nand_spl one.

Removed the hawkboard_nand_config build option -- The spl code now gets compiled with hawkboard_config, after building the main u-boot image, using the CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE. Modified the README.hawkboard to reflect the same.

Signed-off-by Sughosh Ganu <[email protected]>

Cc Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Christian Riesch <[email protected]>

Cc Sudhakar Rajashekhara <[email protected]>

Cc Tom Rini <[email protected]>

---

[...]

Quoted 8 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +0 -0

index a532f8a..a4778b8 100644
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
 #include <asm/arch/emif_defs.h>
 #include <asm/arch/pll_defs.h>
 

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c line 35

Quoted 1 line

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +1 -0

+#if !defined(CONFIG_MACH_DAVINCI_HAWK)

Please no board specific defines.

Quoted 27 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +1 -4

 void da850_waitloop(unsigned long loopcnt)
 {
 	unsigned long	i;

@@ -235,6 +236,7 @@ int da850_ddr_setup(void)
 
 	return 0;
 }
+#endif /* CONFIG_MACH_DAVINCI_HAWK */
 
 __attribute__((weak))
 void board_gpio_init(void)

@@ -242,10 +244,6 @@ void board_gpio_init(void)
 	return;
 }
 
-/* pinmux_resource[] vector is defined in the board specific file */
-extern const struct pinmux_resource pinmuxes[];
-extern const int pinmuxes_size;
-
 int arch_cpu_init(void)
 {
 	/* Unlock kick registers */

@@ -259,6 +257,7 @@ int arch_cpu_init(void)
 	if (davinci_configure_pin_mux_items(pinmuxes, pinmuxes_size))
 		return 1;
 

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c int arch_cpu_init(void) · line 260

Quoted 1 line

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +1 -0

+#if defined(CONFIG_MACH_DAVINCI_DA850_EVM)

here too. I propose here a CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PLL_INIT ...

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c int arch_cpu_init(void) · line 278

Quoted 10 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +2 -0

 	/* PLL setup */
 	da850_pll_init(davinci_pllc0_regs, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PLL0_PLLM);
 	da850_pll_init(davinci_pllc1_regs, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PLL1_PLLM);

@@ -275,6 +274,12 @@ int arch_cpu_init(void)
 #endif
 
 	lpsc_on(CONFIG_SYS_DA850_LPSC_UART);
+
+	da850_ddr_setup();

and around the ddr_setup a CONFIG_SYS_DA850_DDR_INIT ...

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c int arch_cpu_init(void) · line 281

Quoted 3 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +3 -0

+#elif defined(CONFIG_MACH_DAVINCI_HAWK)
+	da8xx_configure_lpsc_items(lpsc, lpsc_size);
+#endif

and we should use da8xx_configure_lpsc_items() for all da850 boards.

This patch breaks current enbw_cmc board compile

[hs at pollux u-boot]$ ./MAKEALL enbw_cmc
Configuring for enbw_cmc board...
enbw_cmc.c:52:35: error: static declaration of 'lpsc' follows non-static declaration /work/hs/u-boot/include/asm/arch/da850_lowlevel.h:33:35: note: previous declaration of 'lpsc' was here make[1]: *** [enbw_cmc.o] Fehler 1
make: *** [board/enbw/enbw_cmc/libenbw_cmc.o] Fehler 2
arm-linux-gnueabi-size: './u-boot': No such file

include/configs/enbw_cmc.h +0 -0

 #define CONFIG_DA8XX_GPIO
 #define CONFIG_HOSTNAME		enbw_cmc
 #define CONFIG_DISPLAY_CPUINFO

Signature · 3 lines

1.7.7.4

[...]

include/configs/cam_enc_4xx.h line 208

Quoted 9 lines

include/configs/cam_enc_4xx.h +1 -0

index a21d448..8e3a4d2 100644
@@ -205,6 +205,7 @@
 
 /* Defines for SPL */
 #define CONFIG_SPL
+#define CONFIG_DM365_SPL

Why we need this define?

hi Heiko,

Quoted 27 lines · Heiko Schocher

Hello Sughosh,

Quoted 15 lines · Sughosh Ganu

This patch moves hawkboard to the new spl infrastructure from the older nand_spl one.

Removed the hawkboard_nand_config build option -- The spl code now gets compiled with hawkboard_config, after building the main u-boot image, using the CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE. Modified the README.hawkboard to reflect the same.

Signed-off-by Sughosh Ganu <[email protected]>

Cc Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Christian Riesch <[email protected]>

Cc Sudhakar Rajashekhara <[email protected]>

Cc Tom Rini <[email protected]>

---

[...]

Quoted 8 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +0 -0

index a532f8a..a4778b8 100644
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@

?#include <asm/arch/emif_defs.h>
?#include <asm/arch/pll_defs.h>

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 1 line

+#if !defined(CONFIG_MACH_DAVINCI_HAWK)

Please no board specific defines.

?Ok, will replace with the arch specific define that you suggest.

Quoted 27 lines

Quoted 27 lines

?void da850_waitloop(unsigned long loopcnt)
?{
? ? unsigned long ? i;

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +1 -4

@@ -235,6 +236,7 @@ int da850_ddr_setup(void)
 
 ? ? return 0;
 ?}
+#endif /* CONFIG_MACH_DAVINCI_HAWK */
 
 ?__attribute__((weak))
 ?void board_gpio_init(void)

@@ -242,10 +244,6 @@ void board_gpio_init(void)
 ? ? return;
 ?}
 
-/* pinmux_resource[] vector is defined in the board specific file */
-extern const struct pinmux_resource pinmuxes[];
-extern const int pinmuxes_size;
-
 ?int arch_cpu_init(void)
 ?{

? ? /* Unlock kick registers */

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +0 -0

@@ -259,6 +257,7 @@ int arch_cpu_init(void)
 ? ? if (davinci_configure_pin_mux_items(pinmuxes, pinmuxes_size))
 ? ? ? ? ? ? return 1;
 

Quoted 3 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c int arch_cpu_init(void) · line 260

Quoted 1 line

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +1 -0

+#if defined(CONFIG_MACH_DAVINCI_DA850_EVM)

here too. I propose here a CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PLL_INIT ...

?Ok.

Quoted 13 lines

Quoted 10 lines

? ? /* PLL setup */
? ? da850_pll_init(davinci_pllc0_regs, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PLL0_PLLM); ? ? da850_pll_init(davinci_pllc1_regs, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PLL1_PLLM);

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +0 -0

@@ -275,6 +274,12 @@ int arch_cpu_init(void)

?#endif

? ? lpsc_on(CONFIG_SYS_DA850_LPSC_UART);
+
+ ? da850_ddr_setup();

and around the ddr_setup a CONFIG_SYS_DA850_DDR_INIT ...

Quoted 5 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c

Quoted 3 lines

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +3 -0

+#elif defined(CONFIG_MACH_DAVINCI_HAWK)
+ ? da8xx_configure_lpsc_items(lpsc, lpsc_size);
+#endif

and we should use da8xx_configure_lpsc_items() for all da850 boards.

?Ok.

Quoted 10 lines

This patch breaks current enbw_cmc board compile

[hs at pollux u-boot]$ ./MAKEALL enbw_cmc
Configuring for enbw_cmc board...
enbw_cmc.c:52:35: error: static declaration of 'lpsc' follows non-static declaration /work/hs/u-boot/include/asm/arch/da850_lowlevel.h:33:35: note: previous declaration of 'lpsc' was here make[1]: *** [enbw_cmc.o] Fehler 1
make: *** [board/enbw/enbw_cmc/libenbw_cmc.o] Fehler 2
arm-linux-gnueabi-size: './u-boot': No such file

?Oops, sorry about that.

<snip>

include/configs/enbw_cmc.h line 52

Quoted 10 lines

include/configs/enbw_cmc.h +0 -0

index c427dc7..804846d 100644
@@ -48,6 +48,8 @@

?#define CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT
?#define CONFIG_DA850_LOWLEVEL
?#define CONFIG_ARCH_CPU_INIT

include/configs/enbw_cmc.h +2 -0

+#define CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PLL_INIT
+#define CONFIG_SYS_DA850_DDR_INIT

?I think we'll need to add this for da850evm.h too.

Quoted 13 lines

?#define CONFIG_DA8XX_GPIO
?#define CONFIG_HOSTNAME ? ? ? ? ? ? ?enbw_cmc
?#define CONFIG_DISPLAY_CPUINFO
--
1.7.7.4

[...]

Quoted 6 lines

include/configs/cam_enc_4xx.h +0 -0

index a21d448..8e3a4d2 100644
@@ -205,6 +205,7 @@
 

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 3 lines

?/* Defines for SPL */
?#define CONFIG_SPL
+#define CONFIG_DM365_SPL

Why we need this define?

?Yeah, missed out cleaning these defines that i had used in V1. Will ?clean up in next version for all the cases.

-sughosh
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot at lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

please remove the da8xx_configure_lpsc_items() in board_gpio_init() in the ./board/enbw/enbw_cmc/enbw_cmc.c() file, and also move ... before I write here a lot of text, here the patch, based on yours, please add it to your patch, and add my

Signed-off-by Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

and tested on the enbw_cmc board, so:

Tested-by Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

to your patch, here the patch:

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +0 -0

index a4778b8..a404916 100644

- ? ? ? lpsc_on(CONFIG_SYS_DA850_LPSC_UART);

Hello Heiko, Sughosh,

Quoted 16 lines · Heiko Schocher

please remove the da8xx_configure_lpsc_items() in board_gpio_init() in the ./board/enbw/enbw_cmc/enbw_cmc.c() file, and also move ... before I write here a lot of text, here the patch, based on yours, please add it to your patch, and add my

Signed-off-by Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

and tested on the enbw_cmc board, so:

Tested-by Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

to your patch, here the patch:

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +0 -0

index a4778b8..a404916 100644

[....]

Quoted 1 line

- lpsc_on(CONFIG_SYS_DA850_LPSC_UART);

Now we can also remove CONFIG_SYS_DA850_LPSC_UART from include/configs/da850evm.h and include/configs/enbw_cmc.h.

This patch moves hawkboard to the new spl infrastructure from the older nand_spl one.

Removed the hawkboard_nand_config build option -- The spl code now gets compiled with hawkboard_config, after building the main u-boot image, using the CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE. Modified the README.hawkboard to reflect the same.

Signed-off-by Sughosh Ganu <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Christian Riesch <[email protected]>

Cc Sudhakar Rajashekhara <[email protected]>

Cc Tom Rini <[email protected]>

---

Changes since V2
* Made changes to fix build break on enbw_cmc board.
* Replaced defines used for conditionally compiling code in ?da850_lowlevel.c to the ones suggested by Heiko.
* Removed unwanted defines from the config files which were added in ?V1.

Changes since V1
* Use a common file instead of board specific files for spl, based on review comments from Christian and Heiko.

?arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c ? ?| ? 23 ++--
?arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? ?4 +-
?arch/arm/include/asm/arch-davinci/da850_lowlevel.h | ? ?9 +
?board/davinci/da8xxevm/da850evm.c ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?| ? ?4 +-
?board/davinci/da8xxevm/hawkboard.c ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? 23 +++
?board/davinci/da8xxevm/hawkboard_nand_spl.c ? ? ? ?| ?115 ---------------
?.../{u-boot-spl.lds => u-boot-spl-da850evm.lds} ? ?| ? ?0
?.../davinci/da8xxevm/u-boot-spl-hawk.lds ? ? ? ? ? | ? 22 ++-
?board/enbw/enbw_cmc/enbw_cmc.c ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? 13 +--
?boards.cfg ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? ?1 -
?doc/README.hawkboard ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? 43 +++---
?include/configs/da850evm.h ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? ?5 +-
?include/configs/enbw_cmc.h ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? ?2 +
?include/configs/hawkboard.h ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?| ? 23 +++-
?nand_spl/board/davinci/da8xxevm/Makefile ? ? ? ? ? | ?155 --------------------

?15 files changed, 111 insertions(+), 331 deletions(-)
?delete mode 100644 board/davinci/da8xxevm/hawkboard_nand_spl.c
?rename board/davinci/da8xxevm/{u-boot-spl.lds => u-boot-spl-da850evm.lds} (100%) ?rename nand_spl/board/davinci/da8xxevm/u-boot.lds => board/davinci/da8xxevm/u-boot-spl-hawk.lds (86%) ?delete mode 100644 nand_spl/board/davinci/da8xxevm/Makefile

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +0 -0

index a532f8a..a404916 100644
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@

?#include <asm/arch/emif_defs.h>
?#include <asm/arch/pll_defs.h>

+#if defined(CONFIG_SYS_DA850_DDR_INIT)

?void da850_waitloop(unsigned long loopcnt)
?{
? ? ? ?unsigned long ? i;

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +1 -4

@@ -235,6 +236,7 @@ int da850_ddr_setup(void)
 
 ? ? ? ?return 0;
 ?}
+#endif /* CONFIG_SYS_DA850_DDR_INIT */
 
 ?__attribute__((weak))
 ?void board_gpio_init(void)

@@ -242,10 +244,6 @@ void board_gpio_init(void)
 ? ? ? ?return;
 ?}
 
-/* pinmux_resource[] vector is defined in the board specific file */
-extern const struct pinmux_resource pinmuxes[];
-extern const int pinmuxes_size;
-
 ?int arch_cpu_init(void)
 ?{

? ? ? ?/* Unlock kick registers */

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +1 -0

@@ -259,13 +257,11 @@ int arch_cpu_init(void)
 ? ? ? ?if (davinci_configure_pin_mux_items(pinmuxes, pinmuxes_size))
 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?return 1;
 
+#if defined(CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PLL_INIT)

? ? ? ?/* PLL setup */
? ? ? ?da850_pll_init(davinci_pllc0_regs, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PLL0_PLLM); ? ? ? ?da850_pll_init(davinci_pllc1_regs, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PLL1_PLLM);

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +1 -4

-
- ? ? ? /* GPIO setup */
- ? ? ? board_gpio_init();
-
+#endif

? ? ? ?/* setup CSn config */
?#if defined(CONFIG_SYS_DA850_CS2CFG)
? ? ? ?writel(CONFIG_SYS_DA850_CS2CFG, &davinci_emif_regs->ab1cr);

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +0 -0

@@ -274,7 +270,15 @@ int arch_cpu_init(void)
 ? ? ? ?writel(CONFIG_SYS_DA850_CS3CFG, &davinci_emif_regs->ab2cr);

?#endif

- ? ? ? lpsc_on(CONFIG_SYS_DA850_LPSC_UART);
+ ? ? ? da8xx_configure_lpsc_items(lpsc, lpsc_size);

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +8 -0

+#if defined(CONFIG_SYS_DA850_DDR_INIT)
+ ? ? ? da850_ddr_setup();
+#endif
+
+ ? ? ? /* GPIO setup */
+ ? ? ? board_gpio_init();
+
+

? ? ? ?NS16550_init((NS16550_t)(CONFIG_SYS_NS16550_COM1),
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?CONFIG_SYS_NS16550_CLK / 16 / CONFIG_BAUDRATE);

arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +0 -0

 ? ? ? ?return 0;
 ?}

include/configs/da850evm.h +0 -0

index fcbbace..68bdbbe 100644
@@ -44,6 +44,8 @@

?#define CONFIG_SYS_HZ ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?1000 ?#define CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT ?#define CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE ? ? ? ? ? 0xc1080000

include/configs/da850evm.h +2 -0

+#define CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PLL_INIT
+#define CONFIG_SYS_DA850_DDR_INIT

?/*
?* Memory Info

include/configs/da850evm.h +0 -0

@@ -142,7 +144,6 @@

?#define CONFIG_CONS_INDEX ? ? ?1 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? /* use UART0 for console */ ?#define CONFIG_BAUDRATE ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?115200 ? ? ? ? ?/* Default baud rate */ ?#define CONFIG_SYS_BAUDRATE_TABLE ? ? ?{ 9600, 19200, 38400, 57600, 115200 } -#define CONFIG_SYS_DA850_LPSC_UART DAVINCI_LPSC_UART2

This patch moves hawkboard to the new spl infrastructure from the older nand_spl one.

Removed the hawkboard_nand_config build option -- The spl code now gets compiled with hawkboard_config, after building the main u-boot image, using the CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE. Modified the README.hawkboard to reflect the same.

Signed-off-by Sughosh Ganu <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Christian Riesch <[email protected]>

Cc Sudhakar Rajashekhara <[email protected]>

Cc Tom Rini <[email protected]>

---

Hello Sughosh,

Quoted 8 lines · Sughosh Ganu

This patch moves hawkboard to the new spl infrastructure from the older nand_spl one.

Removed the hawkboard_nand_config build option -- The spl code now gets compiled with hawkboard_config, after building the main u-boot image, using the CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE. Modified the README.hawkboard to reflect the same.

Quoted 7 lines

Signed-off-by Sughosh Ganu <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Christian Riesch <[email protected]>

Cc Sudhakar Rajashekhara <[email protected]>

Cc Tom Rini <[email protected]>

---

Patch looks good to me, but it doesn't aplly to current TOT

[hs at pollux u-boot]$ git am index.html
Applying: Changes to move hawkboard to the new spl infrastructure
error: patch failed: include/configs/da850evm.h:44
error: include/configs/da850evm.h: patch does not apply
Patch failed at 0001 Changes to move hawkboard to the new spl infrastructure When you have resolved this problem run "git am --resolved".
If you would prefer to skip this patch, instead run "git am --skip". To restore the original branch and stop patching run "git am --abort". [hs at pollux u-boot]$

Hello Sughosh,

Quoted 8 lines · Sughosh Ganu

This patch moves hawkboard to the new spl infrastructure from the older nand_spl one.

Removed the hawkboard_nand_config build option -- The spl code now gets compiled with hawkboard_config, after building the main u-boot image, using the CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE. Modified the README.hawkboard to reflect the same.

Quoted 7 lines

Signed-off-by Sughosh Ganu <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Christian Riesch <[email protected]>

Cc Sudhakar Rajashekhara <[email protected]>

Cc Tom Rini <[email protected]>

---

Patch looks good to me, but it doesn't aplly to current TOT

[hs at pollux u-boot]$ git am index.html
Applying: Changes to move hawkboard to the new spl infrastructure
error: patch failed: include/configs/da850evm.h:44
error: include/configs/da850evm.h: patch does not apply
Patch failed at 0001 Changes to move hawkboard to the new spl infrastructure When you have resolved this problem run "git am --resolved".
If you would prefer to skip this patch, instead run "git am --skip". To restore the original branch and stop patching run "git am --abort". [hs at pollux u-boot]$

My tree is
commit 9a420986cccc9bd2c37affd931d627b3c3e72952

Author: Rob Herring <[email protected]>
Date:   Thu Dec 15 11:15:50 2011 +0000

ARM: highbank: enable networking and pxe

Do I missing something here? (If I remember right, I had no such issue with your v1 patch ...)

This patch moves hawkboard to the new spl infrastructure from the older nand_spl one.

Removed the hawkboard_nand_config build option -- The spl code now gets compiled with hawkboard_config, after building the main u-boot image, using the CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE. Modified the README.hawkboard to reflect the same.

Signed-off-by Sughosh Ganu <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Christian Riesch <[email protected]>

Cc Sudhakar Rajashekhara <[email protected]>

Cc Tom Rini <[email protected]>

Hi Sughosh,

Quoted 8 lines · Sughosh Ganu

This patch moves hawkboard to the new spl infrastructure from the older nand_spl one.

Removed the hawkboard_nand_config build option -- The spl code now gets compiled with hawkboard_config, after building the main u-boot image, using the CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE. Modified the README.hawkboard to reflect the same.

Quoted 6 lines

Signed-off-by Sughosh Ganu <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Christian Riesch <[email protected]>

Cc Sudhakar Rajashekhara <[email protected]>

Cc Tom Rini <[email protected]>

I have tested this with both the da850evm and the calimain board (see [1]), and the low level initialization still works :-)

Therefore

Acked-by Christian Riesch <[email protected]>

hi Christian,

Quoted 18 lines · Christian Riesch

Hi Sughosh,

Quoted 8 lines · Sughosh Ganu

This patch moves hawkboard to the new spl infrastructure from the older nand_spl one.

Removed the hawkboard_nand_config build option -- The spl code now gets compiled with hawkboard_config, after building the main u-boot image, using the CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE. Modified the README.hawkboard to reflect the same.

Quoted 6 lines

Signed-off-by Sughosh Ganu <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

Cc Christian Riesch <[email protected]>

Cc Sudhakar Rajashekhara <[email protected]>

Cc Tom Rini <[email protected]>

Quoted 6 lines

I have tested this with both the da850evm and the calimain board (see [1]), and the low level initialization still works :-)

Therefore

Acked-by Christian Riesch <[email protected]>

?Thanks for the review and ack :)

?Can you also please test out this patch.

?http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/135275/

?Just wanted to make sure it does not introduce any regressions. This ?is a generic arm926ejs fix, so you should be able to test this on ?any arm926ejs based board