From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-ee0-x232.google.com ([2a00:1450:4013:c00::232]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1Wdg5F-0006rS-AP for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 13:22:29 +0000 Received: by mail-ee0-f50.google.com with SMTP id c13so2851051eek.9 for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 06:22:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 15:22:00 +0200 From: Alexander Aring Message-ID: <20140425132158.GA29357@omega> References: <1398426868-30285-1-git-send-email-c.hemp@phytec.de> <1398426868-30285-4-git-send-email-c.hemp@phytec.de> <20140425130834.GA29115@omega> <1398431808.4657.35.camel@weser.hi.pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1398431808.4657.35.camel@weser.hi.pengutronix.de> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] imx6: Add support for phyCARD-i.MX6 To: Lucas Stach Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 03:16:48PM +0200, Lucas Stach wrote: > Am Freitag, den 25.04.2014, 15:10 +0200 schrieb Alexander Aring: > > Hi, > > > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 01:54:28PM +0200, Christian Hemp wrote: > > > Add support for Phytec phyCARD-i.MX6. > > > - 1GB RAM on two banks > > > - 1GB RAM on one bank > > > - 2GB RAM on two banks > > ... > > > + > > > +extern char __dtb_imx6q_phytec_pbaa03_start[]; > > > + > > > +ENTRY_FUNCTION(start_phytec_pbaa03_1gib, r0, r1, r2) > > > +{ > > > + uint32_t fdt; > > > + > > > + arm_cpu_lowlevel_init(); > > > + > > > + arm_setup_stack(0x00920000 - 8); > > > + > > > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_LL)) > > > + setup_uart(); > > > + > > > + fdt = (uint32_t)__dtb_imx6q_phytec_pbaa03_start - get_runtime_offset(); > > > + > > > + barebox_arm_entry(0x10000000, SZ_1G, fdt); > > > +} > > > + > > > +ENTRY_FUNCTION(start_phytec_pbaa03_1gib_1bank, r0, r1, r2) > > > +{ > > > + uint32_t fdt; > > > + > > > + arm_cpu_lowlevel_init(); > > > + > > > + arm_setup_stack(0x00920000 - 8); > > > + > > > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_LL)) > > > + setup_uart(); > > > + > > > + fdt = (uint32_t)__dtb_imx6q_phytec_pbaa03_start - get_runtime_offset(); > > > + > > > + barebox_arm_entry(0x10000000, SZ_1G, fdt); > > > +} > > > + > > > > Don't see a difference between start_phytec_pbaa03_1gib_1bank and > > start_phytec_pbaa03_1gib. Maybe you can write a new function and these > > two functions can call this function... > > > > It's a design question... > > > If those two are really meant to be the same, you don't even need two > entry functions. Just build a single PBL and add different DCDs through > the image mechanism. > ah, nice to known. Thanks Lucas! Indeed, this would be a better solution. - Alex _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox