Hi Gerlando,
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 13:37:54 +0200, Gerlando Falauto gerlando.falauto@keymile.com wrote:
Some boards might be equipped with different SDRAM configurations. When that is the case, CPU CS Window Size Register (CS[0]n Size) should be set to the biggest value through board.cfg file; then its value can be fixed at runtime according to the detected SDRAM size.
Therefore, implement kw_sdram_bs_set(), to be called for instance within board_early_init_f().
Signed-off-by: Gerlando Falauto gerlando.falauto@keymile.com Cc: Marek Vasut marex@denx.de Cc: Prafulla Wadaskar prafulla@marvell.com Cc: Wolfgang Denk wd@denx.de Cc: Valentin Longchamp valentin.longchamp@keymile.com Cc: Holger Brunck holger.brunck@keymile.com
arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/dram.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/cpu.h | 2 ++ 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/dram.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/dram.c index 2441554..e5409f1 100644 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/dram.c +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/dram.c @@ -28,8 +28,15 @@
DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
-#define KW_REG_CPUCS_WIN_BAR(x) (KW_REGISTER(0x1500)
- (x * 0x08)) -#define KW_REG_CPUCS_WIN_SZ(x)
(KW_REGISTER(0x1504) + (x * 0x08)) +/* Kirkwood memory registers */ +#define KW_REG_CPUCS_WIN_BAR(x) (KW_REGISTER(0x1500)
- ((x) * 0x08)) +#define KW_REG_CPUCS_WIN_SZ(x)
(KW_REGISTER(0x1504) + ((x) * 0x08)) + +#define KW_REG_CPUCS_WIN_ENABLE (1 << 0) +#define KW_REG_CPUCS_WIN_WR_PROTECT (1 << 1) +#define KW_REG_CPUCS_WIN_WIN0_CS(x) (((x) & 0x3) << 2) +#define KW_REG_CPUCS_WIN_SIZE(x) (((x) & 0xff) << 24)
/*
- kw_sdram_bar - reads SDRAM Base Address Register
*/ @@ -60,6 +67,23 @@ u32 kw_sdram_bs(enum memory_bank bank) return result; }
+/*
- kw_sdram_bs_set - writes SDRAM Bank size
- */
+void kw_sdram_bs_set(enum memory_bank bank, u32 size) +{
- /* Read current register value */
- u32 reg = readl(KW_REG_CPUCS_WIN_SZ(bank));
- /* Clear window size */
- reg &= ~KW_REG_CPUCS_WIN_SIZE(0xFF);
- /* Set new window size */
- reg |= KW_REG_CPUCS_WIN_SIZE((size - 1) >> 24);
- writel(reg, KW_REG_CPUCS_WIN_SZ(bank));
+}
#ifndef CONFIG_SYS_BOARD_DRAM_INIT int dram_init(void) { diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/cpu.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/cpu.h index d28c51a..807154e 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/cpu.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-kirkwood/cpu.h @@ -159,6 +159,8 @@ void reset_cpu(unsigned long ignored); unsigned char get_random_hex(void); unsigned int kw_sdram_bar(enum memory_bank bank); unsigned int kw_sdram_bs(enum memory_bank bank); +void kw_sdram_bs_set(enum memory_bank bank, u32 size);
int kw_config_adr_windows(void); void kw_config_gpio(unsigned int gpp0_oe_val, unsigned int gpp1_oe_val, unsigned int gpp0_oe, unsigned int gpp1_oe);
I don't like isolated patches that seem to create dead code. I know here it is not the goal, of course; so why not submit a two-patch series, providing both the new code *and* a use for it?
Amicalement,