On 5/8/19 12:17 PM, Chee, Tien Fong wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-05-07 at 21:44 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 5/7/19 9:43 PM, Simon Goldschmidt wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 07.05.19 21:41, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 5/7/19 9:36 PM, Simon Goldschmidt wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 07.05.19 21:19, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> According to SoCFPGA Cyclone V datasheet rev.2018.01.26 page
>>>>>> 175
>>>>>> (Chapter 5, FPGA Manager, data register) and Arria10
>>>>>> datasheet
>>>>>> rev.2017.07.22 page 211 (Chapter 5.4.1.2, FPGA Manager,
>>>>>> img_data_w
>>>>>> register), the FPGA data register must be written with writes
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> non-incrementing address.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The current code increments the address in 32-byte bursts.
>>>>>> Fix the
>>>>>> code so it does not increment the address and writes the
>>>>>> register
>>>>>> repeatedly instead. >
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de>
>>>>>> Cc: Chin Liang See <chin.liang....@intel.com>
>>>>>> Cc: Dinh Nguyen <dingu...@kernel.org>
>>>>>> Cc: Simon Goldschmidt <simon.k.r.goldschm...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> Cc: Tien Fong Chee <tien.fong.c...@intel.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/fpga/socfpga.c | 3 +--
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/fpga/socfpga.c b/drivers/fpga/socfpga.c
>>>>>> index 685957626b..6ecea771ce 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/fpga/socfpga.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/fpga/socfpga.c
>>>>>> @@ -55,8 +55,7 @@ void fpgamgr_program_write(const void
>>>>>> *rbf_data,
>>>>>> size_t rbf_size)
>>>>>> " cmp %2, #0\n"
>>>>>> " beq 2f\n"
>>>>>> "1: ldmia %0!, {r0-r7}\n"
>>>>>> - " stmia %1!, {r0-r7}\n"
>>>>>> - " sub %1, #32\n"
>>>>>> + " stmia %1, {r0-r7}\n"
>>>>> Iirc, stmia without the "!" still stores the registers to
>>>>> different
>>>>> addresses, it just does not change %1 any more if you leave
>>>>> away the
>>>>> "!"? So this would save on opcode, but not change anything?
>>>> Uh oh, you're right. Do we have a bigger problem here then ? Or
>>>> is the
>>>> socfpga ignoring the bottom 5 bits of this register address ?
>>> Well, bitsream programming works for me very well (we're loading
>>> all our
>>> FGPAs in U-Boot from a FIT image), so maybe it's the documentation
>>> that
>>> has a problem?
>> That could indeed be, maybe someone on the CC list can take a look
>> into
>> it and crosscheck it with internal docs ?
>
> I can't find any doc mention about "FPGA data must be written in non-
> incremting address", but i saw there is a description about
> configuration data is buffered in a 64 deep x 32 bits wide FIFO in the
> FPGA Manager https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/programmable/us/en/p
> dfs/literature/hb/arria-10/a10_5v4.pdf (pg. 204)
Well yes, it's a FIFO, but is the FIFO populated by writing to a single
non-incrementing address or are we supposed to write to subsequent
incrementing addresses ?
> Based on my understand through this register fpga_mgr_fpgamgrdata
> address map (0xFFCFE400-0xFFCFE7FF) on pg. 207 , the 256 bytes of FIFO
> buffer is mapping to above range addresses.
0xFFCFE7FF-0xFFCFE400 = 0x400 = 1024 Bytes , not 256 . Why ?
--
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
