Hi Tarek,
On 19.05.2014 05:37, Tarek Dakhran wrote:
> EXYNOS5410 is SoC in Samsung's Exynos5 SoC series.
> Add initial support for this SoC.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tarek Dakhran <t.dakh...@samsung.com>
> Signed-off-by: Vyacheslav Tyrtov <v.tyr...@samsung.com>
> Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa <t.f...@samsung.com>
IIRC, the Reviewed-by tag stands only for the version for which it was
posted, except versions with no changes. This one apparently contains
changes compared to previous version.
> ---
> arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig | 8 ++++++++
> arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c | 1 +
> arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c | 4 ++++
> arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h | 11 ++++++++++-
> 4 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
> index 1602abc..79a3e85 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig
> @@ -84,6 +84,14 @@ config SOC_EXYNOS5250
> help
> Enable EXYNOS5250 SoC support
>
> +config SOC_EXYNOS5410
> + bool "SAMSUNG EXYNOS5410"
> + default y
> + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS5
> + select PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS if PM_RUNTIME
> + help
> + Enable EXYNOS5410 SoC support
> +
> config SOC_EXYNOS5420
> bool "SAMSUNG EXYNOS5420"
> default y
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> index e973ff5..12db6cf 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> @@ -312,6 +312,7 @@ static char const *exynos_dt_compat[] __initconst = {
> "samsung,exynos4412",
> "samsung,exynos5",
> "samsung,exynos5250",
> + "samsung,exynos5410",
AFAIK you don't need this change now, as you can boot using the generic
Exynos5 compatible string just fine.
> "samsung,exynos5420",
> "samsung,exynos5440",
> NULL
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c
> index 78002c7..a95213d 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c
> @@ -60,6 +60,8 @@ static inline void __iomem *cpu_boot_reg_base(void)
> {
> if (soc_is_exynos4210() && samsung_rev() == EXYNOS4210_REV_1_1)
> return S5P_INFORM5;
> + if (soc_is_exynos5410())
> + return sysram_ns_base_addr;
This would suggest that instead you need to enable secure firmware
support on your board, by adding respective firmware node to your dts.
Tushar just sent a similar patch series for Exynos5420 [1].
[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.samsung-soc/31840
> return sysram_base_addr;
> }
>
> @@ -72,6 +74,8 @@ static inline void __iomem *cpu_boot_reg(int cpu)
> return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
> if (soc_is_exynos4412())
> boot_reg += 4*cpu;
> + else if (soc_is_exynos5410())
> + boot_reg += (0x1c);
This offset is typical for secure firmware. The series I mentioned above
also deals with bypassing adding of 4*cpu offset for Exynos5420. Seems
like it might be also necessary for Exynos5410, however I will reply in
that thread with the way I'd see this done.
> else if (soc_is_exynos5420())
> boot_reg += 4;
> return boot_reg;
> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
> b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
> index 5992b8d..21db380 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/cpu.h
> @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ extern unsigned long samsung_cpu_id;
> #define EXYNOS4_CPU_MASK 0xFFFE0000
>
> #define EXYNOS5250_SOC_ID 0x43520000
> +#define EXYNOS5410_SOC_ID 0xE5410000
> #define EXYNOS5420_SOC_ID 0xE5420000
> #define EXYNOS5440_SOC_ID 0xE5440000
> #define EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK 0xFFFFF000
> @@ -72,6 +73,7 @@ IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos4210, EXYNOS4210_CPU_ID,
> EXYNOS4_CPU_MASK)
> IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos4212, EXYNOS4212_CPU_ID, EXYNOS4_CPU_MASK)
> IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos4412, EXYNOS4412_CPU_ID, EXYNOS4_CPU_MASK)
> IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5250, EXYNOS5250_SOC_ID, EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
> +IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5410, EXYNOS5410_SOC_ID, EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
> IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5420, EXYNOS5420_SOC_ID, EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
> IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5440, EXYNOS5440_SOC_ID, EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
>
> @@ -154,6 +156,12 @@ IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5440, EXYNOS5440_SOC_ID,
> EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
> # define soc_is_exynos5250() 0
> #endif
>
> +#if defined(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5410)
> +# define soc_is_exynos5410() is_samsung_exynos5410()
> +#else
> +# define soc_is_exynos5410() 0
> +#endif
> +
> #if defined(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5420)
> # define soc_is_exynos5420() is_samsung_exynos5420()
> #else
> @@ -168,7 +176,8 @@ IS_SAMSUNG_CPU(exynos5440, EXYNOS5440_SOC_ID,
> EXYNOS5_SOC_MASK)
>
> #define soc_is_exynos4() (soc_is_exynos4210() || soc_is_exynos4212() || \
> soc_is_exynos4412())
> -#define soc_is_exynos5() (soc_is_exynos5250() || soc_is_exynos5420())
> +#define soc_is_exynos5() (soc_is_exynos5250() || soc_is_exynos5410() || \
> + soc_is_exynos5420())
After addressing the comments above, you won't need any changes to this
file anymore (including all the soc_is_*() macros).
Best regards,
Tomasz
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
