Hi Andreas,
On 01/16/2015 06:16 PM, Andreas Bießmann wrote:
Hi Bo,
On 01/16/2015 10:30 AM, Bo Shen wrote:
On 01/16/2015 05:10 PM, Andreas Bießmann wrote:
On 01/16/2015 03:53 AM, Bo Shen wrote:
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/at91/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/at91/Makefile
@@ -25,5 +25,9 @@ obj-y += reset.o
obj-y += timer.o
ifndef CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT
+ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD
+obj-y += spl_lowlevel_init.o
+else
obj-y += lowlevel_init.o
endif
+endif
I'm fine with having two variants of lowlevel_init for a time, but we
should consolidate this and use C-style initialisation of SDRAM and
stuff for the other armv5 at91 devices in future. AFAIK the
a/a/c/arm926ejs/at91/lowlevel_init.S is mainly used for NOR Flash boots,
so using the SPL code (but not necessarily the two binary mechanism) for
the NOR Flash boots in future is appreciated.
OK, when all the arm9 at91 related board has SPL support, then I will do
this.
Can we achieve this in this MW?
I will try, but not sure. As I don't have this kind of board :(
I need to check whether we still have this kind of board.
+ENTRY(lowlevel_init)
+ /*
+ * Setup a temporary stack
+ */
+ ldr sp, =CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR
+ bic sp, sp, #7 /* 8-byte alignment for ABI compliance */
+
+ ldr r9, =gdata
I remember some patches removing the SPL gdata stuff, is that true?
Thanks.
Yes, just search for it, the following patch do this.
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/423789/ (arm: Reduce the scope of
lowlevel_init())
I think we should use the function provided there. What do you think?
OK. I will do it in next version.
Thanks.
Best regards
Andreas Bießmann
Best Regards,
Bo Shen
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
