My last three patches were tested in my company's custom i.MX7D pico SoMs
carrier board, it was workd well with 512MB and 1 GB SoM variants in U-boot
v2022.10. I have no any 2GB variants but i can trust in Technexion that it was
tested in their house, bedore.But it can be better if you take contact with
them and request a confirmation about your swtich case logic, is it will be
fine or not for
them.https://github.com/richard-huhttps://github.com/JoeZhang-tn@Tom RiniIs
there any plan to improve the patches, pull-requests, technical review/threads
processes to use a better web-technnolgies instead of to use infinity long-long
ping-pong mailing in a legacy mailing lists? In 2023, It's time to use
something better, for example to use a normal pull request features on
GitHub/GitLab website for U-boot as every modern open-source project use it. It
could be more traceabla and faster in ask a question for a developer, moreover
the code reviewing is much much better in this modern
way.https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot/pulls-------- Eredeti levél
--------Feladó: Fabio Estevam <feste...@gmail.com>Dátum: 2023 január 7
14:37:47Tárgy: Re: [u-boot][master][PATCH 1/3] pico-imx7d: add support for 2GB
memory SoMsCímzett: Szőke Kálmán Benjamin <egyszer...@freemail.hu>Hi Benjamin,
On Sat, Jan 7, 2023 at 8:22 AM Szőke Kálmán Benjamin <egyszer...@freemail.hu>
wrote: > > Original code was a nested if statement for checking 1g() and 2g().
>
https://github.com/TechNexion/u-boot-tn-imx/blob/tn-imx_v2021.04_5.10.72_2.2.0-stable/board/technexion/pico-imx7d/pico-imx7d_spl.c#L106
Yes, I saw that, but it doesn't look good. We can't blindly take the vendor
code as-is and throw it to mainline. When I added the is_1g() function there
was only the 512MB or 1GB variants, so the function name was meaningful. After
adding the 2GB variant, the is_1g() function no longer means that the board has
1GB of RAM. If you want to keep TechNexion logic, at least rename is_1g() to
is_gpio1_12_low() and is_2g() to is_gpio1_13_high(). > Do you have any
information about the PCB layout of the different i.MX7 pico SoM
revisions?Question is, what is the electrical states of GPIO1_12 and GPIO1_13
in real for these variants? My fear is that maybe one of them is not connected
to any VDD (high) or GND (low). Question can be, what is the default logical
state for it high or low if one of them is not connected neither to GND or VDD?
> > I totaly do not understand why you need to completly refactoring the code
if you have no posibbilites to test it with all revision of SoMs. I rather
prefere to keep the original if statement code from Technexion, because that
should works 100% and tested. I have no any 2GB varians SoMs yet, also i can
not test it yet. The code below really bothers me: static void ddr_init(void) {
if (is_1g()) { if (is_2g()) { "If the board has 1GB of RAM, then check if it
has 2GB of RAM" If you want to replace it with is_gpio1_12_low() and
is_gpio1_13_high(), as suggested above, I would accept it. Also, you submitted
the patch without even testing it. That's not good. The pico-imx7d board was
not even booting at all. I fixed it recently by:
https://source.denx.de/u-boot/u-boot/-/commit/f8548ce0e09385926574283b17af6c2cd4e32af2
and now you say that you also don't have the 2GB variant. Please make sure to
test your patches against U-Boot mainline.
