On 12.06.2019, at 17:30, Jagan Teki jagan@amarulasolutions.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 8:36 PM Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com mailto:philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com> wrote:
On 11.06.2019, at 17:03, Jagan Teki jagan@amarulasolutions.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 8:23 PM Philipp Tomsich philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com wrote:
On 11.06.2019, at 16:50, Jagan Teki jagan@amarulasolutions.com wrote:
Yes, it can be possible to break this series into multiple sub series but idea here is to mark all the required changes to support LPDDR4 in rk3399 in one set. if required we can break it from next versions.
This is the initial set for supporting LPDDR4 with associated features.
Thanks to
- YouMin Chen
- Akash Gajjar
- Kever Yang
for supporting all the help on this work.
On summary this series support
- Code warning and fixes
- rank detection, this would required to probe single channel
sdram configured in NanoPI-NEO4
- LPDDR4 support, tested in Rockpro64 and Rock-PI-4
patch 0001 - 0033: fix code warnings, prints, new macros
patch 0034 - 0051: rank detection, sdram debug code
patch 0052: Use DDR3-1800 on NanoPI-NEO4
patch 0053 - 0089: lpddr4 support
patch 0090: LPDDR4-100 timings
patch 0091: Use LPDDR4-100 on Rockpro64
patch 0092: Use LPDDR4-100 on Rock-PI 4
Note: Puma rk3399 has SPL size overflow, better to enable TPL for this board.
We need to keep Puma on a SPL-only configuration for the time being. Please make sure that the LPDDR4 code is an optional feature that does not increase the DRAM-driver size for boards that don’t need/want it.
We have few boards do have TPL-runnable, would be any technical issue to switch puma to TPL? because we have lpddr4 code part of existing driver itself and it require extra ifdef to consider which indeed look awful from code point-of-view.
Our secure boot process (i.e. signing tools) currently depends on this and the changeover won’t be quick…
Not so quick, we have time till MW. isn't it possible? enabling secure tools in both TPL and SPL or TPL-alone would be meaningful trail. what do you think?
We aren’t talking about a single MW here, given that summer is starting to eat up some of my resources…
Thanks, Phil.