Update WRT gpio.h and hardware.h, below. > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Warren > Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 1:05 PM > To: 'Stephen Warren'; Tom Warren > Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Stephen Warren > Subject: RE: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] ARM: Tegra210: Add SoC code/include files > for T210 > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Stephen Warren [mailto:swar...@wwwdotorg.org] > > Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 10:11 AM > > To: Tom Warren > > Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Stephen Warren; Tom Warren > > Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] ARM: Tegra210: Add SoC code/include > > files for T210 > > > > On 06/03/2015 02:35 PM, Tom Warren wrote: > > > All based off of Tegra124. As a Tegra210 board is brought up, these > > > may change a bit to match the HW more closely, but probably 90% of > > > this is identical to T124. > > > > Rather than duplicating lots of headers and code, can we share the > > content with other chips? > Sure, but I wasn't looking at this patchset as a reworking of all Tegra common > headers, but an inclusion of T210 support. We can then move to > common/shared content after this is in, or someone (you?) can do it now > before I add T210 support, but that'll delay it. > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra210/funcmux.h > > > b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra210/funcmux.h > > > > We should be able to drop funcmux support completely now that we're > > programming entire board pinmux tables. > I'll look into it, but I believe funcmux is only used to get early UART muxes > set, > which is done before the pinmux table is parsed/written. > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra210/gpio.h > > > b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra210/gpio.h > > > > > +enum gpio_pin { > > > + GPIO_PA0 = 0, /* pin 0 */ > > > + GPIO_PA1, > > > > Given the move to DT, are any of these GPIO_xxx values actually used? > > I wonder how many other types/defines in the other files are actually > > used, rather than simply left over from times gone by. > Again, that's more of a general Tegra cleanup phase then this patchset is > intended for. I'll take a quick look, but I don't want to get delayed by > doing a > bunch of Tegra cleanup stuff right now. They're used in the pinmux table (pinmux-config-venice2.h, for example) and some board files (nyan-big.c, cardhu.c, seaboard.c). Can't remove 'em.
> > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra210/hardware.h > > > b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra210/hardware.h > > > > Can we drop this file? I don't see a hardware.h in any of the other > > arch-tegra*/ directories. > Sure. It's never been used AFAICT. Can't drop hardware.h. It's expected to be in every build, included from arch/arm/include/asm/hardware.h, created by Wolfgang way back in 2003. > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra210/tegra.h > > > b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra210/tegra.h > > > > > +#define BCT_ODMDATA_OFFSET 1704 /* offset to ODMDATA word */ > > > + > > > +#undef NVBOOTINFOTABLE_BCTSIZE > > > +#undef NVBOOTINFOTABLE_BCTPTR > > > +#define NVBOOTINFOTABLE_BCTSIZE 0x48 /* BCT size in BIT in > > IRAM */ > > > +#define NVBOOTINFOTABLE_BCTPTR 0x4C /* BCT pointer in BIT in > > IRAM */ > > > > Have you validated those? I'm pretty sure the BCT and perhaps BIT > > layout changed in T210, and those values match T124. > Good point. They have changed, since the BCT structure has changed. I'll > update them w/real T210 offsets. > > > > > Have all the clock tables and IDs been updated to match T210? If not, > > I think we should do that before checking in the code, or it'll be > > misleading. > I believe so - I'm using the clock tables from my 'fully working' branch, so > they > should be accurate/jibe with the TRM, but I'll double-check. > > -- > nvpublic _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
