On 10/21/2016 03:28 AM, Wenbin song wrote:
The LS1043A rev1.1 silicon supports two types of GIC offset: 4K alignment and 64K alignment. 4K alignment is consistent with rev1.0 implement.
The default GIC offset in kernel device tree is using 64K alignment, if rev1.0 silicon used, need to fixup the GIC node to use 4K alignment.
Signed-off-by: Wenbin Song wenbin.song@nxp.com Signed-off-by: Mingkai Hu mingkai.hu@nxp.com
Changes for v3: Replace CONFIG_LS1043A with HAS_FEATURE_GIC4K_ALIGN.
arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++ .../include/asm/arch-fsl-layerscape/immap_lsch2.h | 3 +- 2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c index 1a8321b..54f8492 100644 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c @@ -126,6 +126,52 @@ void fsl_fdt_disable_usb(void *blob) } }
+#ifdef CONFIG_HAS_FEATURE_GIC4K_ALIGN +/* Fixup gic node align with 4K */ +static void fdt_fixup_gic(void *blob) +{
- int offset, err;
- u64 reg[8];
- struct ccsr_gur __iomem *gur = (void *)(CONFIG_SYS_FSL_GUTS_ADDR);
- unsigned int val;
- struct ccsr_scfg __iomem *scfg = (void *)CONFIG_SYS_FSL_SCFG_ADDR;
- val = gur_in32(&gur->svr) & 0xff;
- if (val == REV1_1) {
val = scfg_in32(&scfg->gic_align) & (0x01 << GIC_ADDR_BIT);if (!val)return;- }
For rev 1.0 SoC, it runs through here, right? If that what you want?
- offset = fdt_subnode_offset(blob, 0, "interrupt-controller@1400000");
- if (offset < 0) {
printf("WARNING: fdt_subnode_offset can't find node %s: %s\n","interrupt-controller@1400000", fdt_strerror(offset));return;- }
- reg[0] = cpu_to_fdt64(0x1401000);
- reg[1] = cpu_to_fdt64(0x1000);
- reg[2] = cpu_to_fdt64(0x1402000);
- reg[3] = cpu_to_fdt64(0x2000);
- reg[4] = cpu_to_fdt64(0x1404000);
- reg[5] = cpu_to_fdt64(0x2000);
- reg[6] = cpu_to_fdt64(0x1406000);
- reg[7] = cpu_to_fdt64(0x2000);
What are these magic numbers?
- err = fdt_setprop(blob, offset, "reg", reg, sizeof(reg));
- if (err < 0) {
printf("WARNING: fdt_setprop can't set %s from node %s: %s\n","reg", "interrupt-controller@1400000",fdt_strerror(err));return;- }
- return;
+} +#endif
void ft_cpu_setup(void *blob, bd_t *bd) { #ifdef CONFIG_FSL_LSCH2 @@ -170,4 +216,7 @@ void ft_cpu_setup(void *blob, bd_t *bd) #endif fsl_fdt_disable_usb(blob);
+#ifdef CONFIG_HAS_FEATURE_GIC4K_ALIGN
- fdt_fixup_gic(blob);
+#endif } diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-fsl-layerscape/immap_lsch2.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-fsl-layerscape/immap_lsch2.h index d88543d..1dfef53 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-fsl-layerscape/immap_lsch2.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-fsl-layerscape/immap_lsch2.h @@ -359,7 +359,8 @@ struct ccsr_scfg { u32 qspi_cfg; u8 res_160[0x180-0x160]; u32 dmamcr;
- u8 res_184[0x18c-0x184];
- u8 res_184[0x188-0x184];
- u32 gic_align; u32 debug_icid; u8 res_190[0x1a4-0x190]; u32 snpcnfgcr;
Would it be reasonable to squash this patch with previous one in this set? They both deal with the same thing. If you run git bisect between this two, you don't get correct gic offset in device tree, do you?
York