mail archive of the barebox mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] ARM i.MX27: initialize MAX
@ 2011-12-08  9:17 Sascha Hauer
  2011-12-08 14:24 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sascha Hauer @ 2011-12-08  9:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: barebox

Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
---
 arch/arm/mach-imx/imx27.c                   |   43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/mach-imx/include/mach/imx27-regs.h |    1 +
 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/imx27.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/imx27.c
index 86039c4..1af291d 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/imx27.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/imx27.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
 #include <mach/imx-regs.h>
 #include <sizes.h>
 #include <init.h>
+#include <io.h>
 
 #include "gpio.h"
 
@@ -38,11 +39,53 @@ void *imx_gpio_base[] = {
 
 int imx_gpio_count = ARRAY_SIZE(imx_gpio_base) * 32;
 
+/*
+ * Initialize MAX on i.MX27. necessary to give the DMA engine
+ * higher priority to the memory than the CPU. Needed for proper
+ * audio support
+ */
+#define MAX_SLAVE_MPR_OFFSET	0x0	/* Master Priority register */
+#define MAX_SLAVE_AMPR_OFFSET	0x4	/* Alternate Master Priority register */
+#define MAX_SLAVE_PORT0_OFFSET	0x0
+#define MAX_SLAVE_PORT1_OFFSET	0x100
+#define MAX_SLAVE_PORT2_OFFSET	0x200
+#define MAX_MASTER_PRIO(master, prio)	(((prio) << (master) * 4))
+
+#define MASTER_IAHB	0
+#define MASTER_DAHB	1
+#define MASTER_EMMA	2
+#define MASTER_DMA	3
+#define MASTER_SLDC	4
+#define MASTER_CODEC	5
+
+static void imx27_init_max(void)
+{
+	void __iomem *max_base = (void *)IMX_MAX_BASE;
+	u32 val;
+
+	/* 0 is the highest priority */
+	val = MAX_MASTER_PRIO(MASTER_IAHB, 5) |
+		MAX_MASTER_PRIO(MASTER_DAHB, 4) |
+		MAX_MASTER_PRIO(MASTER_EMMA, 1) |
+		MAX_MASTER_PRIO(MASTER_DMA, 2) |
+		MAX_MASTER_PRIO(MASTER_SLDC, 0) |
+		MAX_MASTER_PRIO(MASTER_CODEC, 3);
+
+	writel(val, max_base + MAX_SLAVE_PORT0_OFFSET + MAX_SLAVE_MPR_OFFSET);
+	writel(val, max_base + MAX_SLAVE_PORT1_OFFSET + MAX_SLAVE_MPR_OFFSET);
+	writel(val, max_base + MAX_SLAVE_PORT2_OFFSET + MAX_SLAVE_MPR_OFFSET);
+	writel(val, max_base + MAX_SLAVE_PORT0_OFFSET + MAX_SLAVE_AMPR_OFFSET);
+	writel(val, max_base + MAX_SLAVE_PORT1_OFFSET + MAX_SLAVE_AMPR_OFFSET);
+	writel(val, max_base + MAX_SLAVE_PORT2_OFFSET + MAX_SLAVE_AMPR_OFFSET);
+}
+
 static int imx27_init(void)
 {
 	add_generic_device("imx_iim", 0, NULL, IMX_IIM_BASE, SZ_4K,
 			IORESOURCE_MEM, NULL);
 
+	imx27_init_max();
+
 	return 0;
 }
 coredevice_initcall(imx27_init);
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/include/mach/imx27-regs.h b/arch/arm/mach-imx/include/mach/imx27-regs.h
index 6754c5a..3a4325e 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/include/mach/imx27-regs.h
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/include/mach/imx27-regs.h
@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@
 #define IMX_IIM_BASE               (0x28000 + IMX_IO_BASE)
 #define IMX_OTG_BASE               (0x24000 + IMX_IO_BASE)
 #define IMX_FEC_BASE               (0x2b000 + IMX_IO_BASE)
+#define IMX_MAX_BASE               (0x3f000 + IMX_IO_BASE)
 
 #define IMX_NFC_BASE               (0xd8000000)
 #define IMX_ESD_BASE               (0xd8001000)
-- 
1.7.7.3


_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] ARM i.MX27: initialize MAX
  2011-12-08  9:17 [PATCH] ARM i.MX27: initialize MAX Sascha Hauer
@ 2011-12-08 14:24 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
  2011-12-09  8:06   ` Sascha Hauer
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD @ 2011-12-08 14:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sascha Hauer; +Cc: barebox

On 10:17 Thu 08 Dec     , Sascha Hauer wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
> ---
>  arch/arm/mach-imx/imx27.c                   |   43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  arch/arm/mach-imx/include/mach/imx27-regs.h |    1 +
>  2 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
do we really need this in barebox?

Best Regards,
J.

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] ARM i.MX27: initialize MAX
  2011-12-08 14:24 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
@ 2011-12-09  8:06   ` Sascha Hauer
  2011-12-09 10:46     ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sascha Hauer @ 2011-12-09  8:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD; +Cc: barebox

On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 03:24:33PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> On 10:17 Thu 08 Dec     , Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm/mach-imx/imx27.c                   |   43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  arch/arm/mach-imx/include/mach/imx27-regs.h |    1 +
> >  2 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> do we really need this in barebox?

Why not? It's basically just a handfull of register accesses which are
normally hidden in lowlevel_init without anybody noticing it. The fact
that I created defines for them just makes it slightly more visible.

Sascha


-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] ARM i.MX27: initialize MAX
  2011-12-09  8:06   ` Sascha Hauer
@ 2011-12-09 10:46     ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
  2011-12-09 11:29       ` Sascha Hauer
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD @ 2011-12-09 10:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sascha Hauer; +Cc: barebox

On 09:06 Fri 09 Dec     , Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 03:24:33PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > On 10:17 Thu 08 Dec     , Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
> > > ---
> > >  arch/arm/mach-imx/imx27.c                   |   43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  arch/arm/mach-imx/include/mach/imx27-regs.h |    1 +
> > >  2 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > do we really need this in barebox?
> 
> Why not? It's basically just a handfull of register accesses which are
> normally hidden in lowlevel_init without anybody noticing it. The fact
> that I created defines for them just makes it slightly more visible.
can we have a small comment when they are needed at list

Best Regards,
J.

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] ARM i.MX27: initialize MAX
  2011-12-09 10:46     ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
@ 2011-12-09 11:29       ` Sascha Hauer
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sascha Hauer @ 2011-12-09 11:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD; +Cc: barebox

On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 11:46:31AM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> On 09:06 Fri 09 Dec     , Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 03:24:33PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > > On 10:17 Thu 08 Dec     , Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > > > Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
> > > > ---
> > > >  arch/arm/mach-imx/imx27.c                   |   43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >  arch/arm/mach-imx/include/mach/imx27-regs.h |    1 +
> > > >  2 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > > do we really need this in barebox?
> > 
> > Why not? It's basically just a handfull of register accesses which are
> > normally hidden in lowlevel_init without anybody noticing it. The fact
> > that I created defines for them just makes it slightly more visible.
> can we have a small comment when they are needed at list

What do you mean? The patch has this:

> +/*
> + * Initialize MAX on i.MX27. necessary to give the DMA engine
> + * higher priority to the memory than the CPU. Needed for proper
> + * audio support
> + */

(I agree that this does not necessarily has to be done in barebox, but
my plan is to send a patch for the kernel aswell. This increases the
chance that it is done at least once somewhere)

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2011-12-09 11:29 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-12-08  9:17 [PATCH] ARM i.MX27: initialize MAX Sascha Hauer
2011-12-08 14:24 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2011-12-09  8:06   ` Sascha Hauer
2011-12-09 10:46     ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2011-12-09 11:29       ` Sascha Hauer

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox