On 12-18 23:25, Stefan Wahren wrote:
> >
> > +static struct mm_region bcm2712_mem_map[MEM_MAP_MAX_ENTRIES] = {
> > + {
> in comparison to mach-imx/imx9/soc.c most of the memory maps doesn't
> have a describing comment.
Yep, I have thinking to add more comments, but decided to not modify too
much patch from Dmitry. On the other side there is not much excitement
stuff here.
> > + .virt = 0x00000000UL,
> > + .phys = 0x00000000UL,
> > + .size = 0x3f800000UL,
> > + .attrs = PTE_BLOCK_MEMTYPE(MT_NORMAL) |
> > + PTE_BLOCK_INNER_SHARE
> > + }, {
> > + .virt = 0x3f800000UL,
> > + .phys = 0x3f800000UL,
> > + .size = 0x00800000UL,
> > + .attrs = PTE_BLOCK_MEMTYPE(MT_DEVICE_NGNRNE) |
> > + PTE_BLOCK_NON_SHARE |
> > + PTE_BLOCK_PXN | PTE_BLOCK_UXN
> > + }, {
> > + /* Beginning of AXI bus where uSD controller lives */
> > + .virt = 0x1000000000UL,
> > + .phys = 0x1000000000UL,
> > + .size = 0x0002000000UL,
> > + .attrs = PTE_BLOCK_MEMTYPE(MT_DEVICE_NGNRNE) |
> > + PTE_BLOCK_NON_SHARE |
> > + PTE_BLOCK_PXN | PTE_BLOCK_UXN
> > + }, {
> > + .virt = 0x107c000000UL,
> > + .phys = 0x107c000000UL,
> > + .size = 0x0004000000UL,
> > + .attrs = PTE_BLOCK_MEMTYPE(MT_DEVICE_NGNRNE) |
> > + PTE_BLOCK_NON_SHARE |
> > + PTE_BLOCK_PXN | PTE_BLOCK_UXN
> > + }, {
> > + /* List terminator */
> > + 0,
> > + }
> > +};
> > +
> > struct mm_region *mem_map = bcm283x_mem_map;
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -78,6 +113,7 @@ static const struct udevice_id board_ids[] = {
> > { .compatible = "brcm,bcm2837", .data = (ulong)&bcm283x_mem_map},
> > { .compatible = "brcm,bcm2838", .data = (ulong)&bcm2711_mem_map},
> > { .compatible = "brcm,bcm2711", .data = (ulong)&bcm2711_mem_map},
> > + { .compatible = "brcm,bcm2712", .data = (ulong)&bcm2712_mem_map},
> > { },
> > };
> >
> Looking at the complete file, i saw the function print_cpuinfo().
> Personally i think it's wrong to print BCM283x in case of a RPI 4 or 5.
CONFIG_DISPLAY_CPUINFO is not set for RPi's, but I suppose this could be nice
aesthetic enhancement.
Thanks,
Ivan
