Hi Kever,
On 2023-10-08 11:09, Kever Yang wrote:
>
> On 2023/10/8 05:25, John Clark wrote:
>> NanoPC-T6 is a Rockchip RK3588 based SBC by FriendlyElec.
>>
>> There are four variants depending on the DRAM size: 4G/32GB eMMC, 8G/64GB
>> eMMC,
>> 16G/16MB SPI NOR, and 16G/256GB eMMC/16MB SPI NOR
>
> So the board is using SPI NOR flash.
>
>
> [...]
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3588/rk3588.c
>> b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3588/rk3588.c
>> index b1f535fad5..e08ebfa39b 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3588/rk3588.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3588/rk3588.c
>> @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
>> const char * const boot_devices[BROM_LAST_BOOTSOURCE + 1] = {
>> [BROM_BOOTSOURCE_EMMC] = "/mmc@fe2e0000",
>> [BROM_BOOTSOURCE_SPINOR] = "/spi@fe2b0000/flash@0",
>> + [BROM_BOOTSOURCE_SPINAND] = "/spi@fe2b0000/flash@0",
>
> Why need a SPI NAND?
>
> If this is really needed, will be a separate patch to support a new boot
> source from bootrom.
I have done spi boot testing on a few rk3588 boards with SPI NOR flash,
and there seem to be a correlation between the bootsource/bootdevice id
written to reg by the bootrom and the fspi iomux used by the board.
Following bootsource/bootdevice value can be read from reg,
- FSPI (M0): 3
- FSPI (M1): 4
- FSPI (M2): 6
based on testing on the following boards:
- Radxa ROCK 5 Model A - fspim0_pins - rk3588s
- Xunlong Orange Pi 5 - fspim0_pins - rk3588s
brom_bootdevice_id: 3
- FriendlyElec NanoPC-T6 - fspim1_pins - rk3588
- Xunlong Orange Pi 5 Plus - fspim1_pins - rk3588
brom_bootdevice_id: 4
- Radxa ROCK 5 Model B - fspim2_pins - rk3588
brom_bootdevice_id: 6
Can these observations be correct? And if so, maybe we should use
following constants for RK3588?
BROM_BOOTSOURCE_FSPI_M0 = 3
BROM_BOOTSOURCE_FSPI_M1 = 4
BROM_BOOTSOURCE_FSPI_M2 = 6
Any insights into what values bootrom will write to reg would be very
helpful.
Regards,
Jonas
>
>
> Thanks,
> - Kever
>
