On 10:16 Sun 03 May , Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD [mailto:plagnioj@jcrosoft.com] Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2009 2:02 PM To: Prafulla Wadaskar Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Ashish Karkare; Prabhanjan Sarnaik; Ronen Shitrit Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v4] Marvell Kirkwood family SOC support
On 14:41 Sat 02 May , Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
Thanks Jean for your review...
diff --git a/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/kwcore.c b/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/kwcore.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000..9eaaab6 --- /dev/null +++ b/cpu/arm926ejs/kirkwood/kwcore.c
please cpu.c
Okay I will rename it
*/ -#ifndef CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT +#if !defined (CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT) || defined +(CONFIG_ARCH_LOWLEVEL_INIT)
NACK
if you skip the lowlevel init you also skip the arch lowlevel_init
I got it already, I have encapsulated similar condition at
caller function so that even though only ARCH_LOWLEVEL_INIT is define it will not skip it.
if it's permannent arch init please use arch_cpu_init
Is it really lowlevel init, needs to be called before
stack/dram init, so please let it be arch_lowlevel_init.
I am trying to keep minimal code under arch_lowlevel_init (only few assembly lines) rest I am moving to arch_cpu_init under lib_arm/board.c
the arch_cpu_init is the first init in c and I want the current design clear If you choice to skip the lowlevel_init you will skip all lowlevel_init with no exception as I've in mind to regroup all start.S
In this case....I think Let's have arch_cpu_init (c function call) to take care of Soc Specific init and Let's use lowlevel_init instead of arch_lowlevel_init for any configuration before stack init. arch_lowlevel_init should be assembly code similar to lowlevel_init and is invoking should be similar
In case of kirkwood specially in some board version if we use Kirkwood without internal BootROM we need to configure DRAM before setting stack in DRAM, this should be done in lowlevel_init.S i.e. lowlevel_init or arch_lowlevel_init jump
sure but in this case you will have to init everythink as done for ofther ARCH at91 in norflash boot, ixp, pxa etc...
if the dram init is common of the arch the arch_lowlevel_init is the right place, it's board specific lowlevel_init is.
please also note I'm preparing 2 new patch that will introduce board_pre_lowlevel_init and arch_pre_lowlevel_init with the board that use it (already mainline)
What do you think? Or what is in your mind about regroup start.S?
For the start.S I'll take care of this actually nearly all arm share the same start.S and normaly the lowlevel_init is always the same wiht just few specific thinks which will be care by some few callback
Best Regards, J.