On 11/22/2015 09:53 AM, York Sun wrote:
>
>
> On 11/22/2015 08:11 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi York,
>>
<snip>
>>> diff --git a/common/board_f.c b/common/board_f.c
>>> index 8061105..2fd1c21 100644
>>> --- a/common/board_f.c
>>> +++ b/common/board_f.c
>>> @@ -316,6 +316,15 @@ __weak ulong board_get_usable_ram_top(ulong total_size)
>>> return gd->ram_top;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +__weak phys_size_t board_reserve_ram_top(phys_size_t ram_size)
>>> +{
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SYS_MEM_TOP_HIDE
>>> + return ram_size - CONFIG_SYS_MEM_TOP_HIDE;
>>> +#else
>>> + return ram_size;
>>> +#endif
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static int setup_dest_addr(void)
>>> {
>>> debug("Monitor len: %08lX\n", gd->mon_len);
>>> @@ -332,19 +341,17 @@ static int setup_dest_addr(void)
>>> */
>>> gd->secure_ram = gd->ram_size;
>>> #endif
>>> -#if defined(CONFIG_SYS_MEM_TOP_HIDE)
>>> /*
>>> * Subtract specified amount of memory to hide so that it won't
>>> * get "touched" at all by U-Boot. By fixing up gd->ram_size
>>> * the Linux kernel should now get passed the now "corrected"
>>> - * memory size and won't touch it either. This should work
>>> - * for arch/ppc and arch/powerpc. Only Linux board ports in
>>> - * arch/powerpc with bootwrapper support, that recalculate the
>>> - * memory size from the SDRAM controller setup will have to
>>> - * get fixed.
>>> + * memory size and won't touch it either. This has been used
>>> + * by arch/powerpc exclusively. Now ARMv8 takes advantage of
>>> + * thie mechanism. If memory is split into banks, addresses
>>> + * need to be calculated.
>>> */
>>> - gd->ram_size -= CONFIG_SYS_MEM_TOP_HIDE;
>>> -#endif
>>> + gd->ram_size = board_reserve_ram_top(gd->ram_size);
>>> +
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE
>>> gd->ram_top = CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE;
>>> #endif
>>
>> Sorry I didn't notice this patch before...
>>
>> Can you use the existing board_get_usable_ram_top() for this?
>>
>
> Simon,
>
> No. The "top" is not necessarily the end of memory. It is the top of
> CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE + get_effective_memsize(). I am trying to avoid
> reserving
> memory in the middle.
>
> I am using the same way as CONFIG_SYS_MEM_TOP_HIDE, but rewriting it with a
> weak
> function.
>
Simon,
If you are satisfied with my explanation, I am considering to merge this patch.
York
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
