Hi Albert,
On 09/23/2013 04:37 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi Michal,
>
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:19:52 +0200, Michal Simek <mon...@monstr.eu>
> wrote:
>
>> On 09/23/2013 02:31 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
>>> Hi Michal,
>>>
>>> On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:52:02 +0200, Michal Simek
>>> <michal.si...@xilinx.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Zynq lowlevel_init() was implemented in C but stack
>>>> pointer is setup after function call in _main().
>>>> Move architecture setup to arch_cpu_init() which is call
>>>> as the first function in board_init_f() which
>>>> already have correct stack pointer.
>>>>
>>>> Reported-by: Sven Schwermer <sven.schwer...@tuhh.de>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.si...@xilinx.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> I can't see any problem to call zynq setup a little
>>>> bit later. There is already expectation that u-boot
>>>> runs from DDR.
>>>> Moving lowlevel_init from C to ASM is possible but
>>>> I will have to introduce new macros with hardcoded
>>>> values. Using structures is much nicer.
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/cpu.c | 6 ++++++
>>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/cpu.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/cpu.c
>>>> index 4367d1a..8846f30 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/cpu.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/zynq/cpu.c
>>>> @@ -11,6 +11,10 @@
>>>>
>>>> void lowlevel_init(void)
>>>> {
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> I'd rather you deleted lowlevel_init() as a C function with this
>>> name should not exist.
>>
>> Ok. Do you want me to create almost empty low_level.S or just use
>> arch/arm/cpu/arvm7/lowlevel_init.S and define empty s_init()?
>
> Urgh. I realize removing the C function would give you more work than
> simply keeping it empty until the whole s_init() mess is cleaned up. :(
>
> I'll take your change as-is, sorry for the noise.
In connection to this topic we have recently found one issue
regarding to neon instruction which u-boot uses.
We have this code to enable them in asm and adding this to lowlevel_init.S
is straight way how to do so.
mov r0, r0
mrc p15, 0, r1, c1, c0, 2
orr r1, r1, #(0xf << 20)
mcr p15, 0, r1, c1, c0, 2
fmrx r1, FPEXC
orr r1,r1, #(1<<30)
fmxr FPEXC, r1
Is it ok to create zynq asm specific lowlevel function
or doing this through s_init() or you have nice a clean way how
this should be solved when you are saying that s_init() is mess.
Thanks,
Michal
--
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng), OpenPGP -> KeyID: FE3D1F91
w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854
Maintainer of Linux kernel - Microblaze cpu - http://www.monstr.eu/fdt/
Maintainer of Linux kernel - Xilinx Zynq ARM architecture
Microblaze U-BOOT custodian and responsible for u-boot arm zynq platform
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
