Hi Tim, On 05/29/14 07:11, Tim Harvey wrote: > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Nikita Kiryanov <nik...@compulab.co.il> > wrote: >> Hi Tim, >> Sorry for the late reply. > > no worries - your the only review of this revision thus far ;) > >> >> >> On 08/05/14 08:16, Tim Harvey wrote: >>> >>> Add a common spl.c file to support boot device functions needed for SPL >>> such as detecting the boot device. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Tim Harvey <thar...@gateworks.com> >>> --- >>> v3: >>> - added Freescale copyright >>> >>> v2: >>> - re-base on top of Masahiro Yamada's consolidation patch: >>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/341817/ >>> - moved spl_boot_device() and get_boot_mode() into own common imx spl.c >>> file >>> - use mem-mapped structure for smbr reg access >>> --- >> >> >> [..snip..] >> >> >>> + } >>> + break; >>> + /* SD/eSD: 8.5.3, Table 8-15 */ >>> + case 0x4: >>> + case 0x5: >>> + return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1; >>> + /* MMC/eMMC: 8.5.3 */ >>> + case 0x6: >>> + case 0x7: >>> + return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1; >>> + /* NAND Flash: 8.5.2 */ >>> + case 0x8 ... 0xf: >>> + return BOOT_DEVICE_NAND; >>> + } >>> + return BOOT_DEVICE_NONE; >>> +} >>> +#endif >>> + >>> +#if defined(CONFIG_SPL_MMC_SUPPORT) >>> +/* called from spl_mmc to see type of boot mode for storage (RAW or FAT) >>> */ >>> +u32 spl_boot_mode(void) >>> +{ >>> + switch (spl_boot_device()) { >>> + /* for MMC return either RAW or FAT mode */ >>> + case BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1: >>> + case BOOT_DEVICE_MMC2: >> >> >> spl_boot_device() returns only BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1. Was the MMC/eMMC case >> supposed to return a BOOT_DEVICE_MMC2? > > Its hard to say - I think the use of BOOT_DEVICE_* is very > implementation specific. I don't quite understand why there is a > BOOT_DEVICE_MMC{1,2,2_2} defined in arch/arm/include/asm/spl.h - the > BOOT_DEVICE_MMC2_2 is certainly quite odd.
AFAIK, this is needed to support eMMC boot partitions which are physical and not logical, but they are still within the same device. > In uboot/common/spl/spl.c > they are all treated the same and spl_mmc_load_image() always assumes > the 'first' mmc device anyway. > > In the IMX6 case I'm not sure an SD/uSD card would be treated any > different than an MMC card so it would come down to which specific > device is flagged as the boot device, of which there are 4 sdhc's. So > eventually, one might need to add more BOOT_DEVICE_MMC enums if that > is to be supported. For now, I'm keeping it simple and there is an > issue with IMX6 spl_mmc_load_image() anyway which I plan on addressing > later. > > Tim > >> >> Aside from this nitpick, >> Acked-by: Nikita Kiryanov <nik...@compulab.co.il> > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot@lists.denx.de > http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot > -- Regards, Igor. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
