[U-Boot] [PATCH] mpc83xx: Size optimization of start.S
Currently there are in excess of 100 bytes located at the beginning of the image built by start.S that are not being utilized. This patch moves a few functions into this part of the image. This will create a greater number of *available* bytes that can be used by board specific code in NAND builds and will decrease the size of the assembled code in other builds.
Signed-off-by: Ron Madrid ron_madrid@sbcglobal.net --- cpu/mpc83xx/start.S | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- 1 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cpu/mpc83xx/start.S b/cpu/mpc83xx/start.S index cd566b2..b040e3b 100644 --- a/cpu/mpc83xx/start.S +++ b/cpu/mpc83xx/start.S @@ -108,6 +108,45 @@ version_string: .ascii " (", __DATE__, " - ", __TIME__, ")" .ascii " ", CONFIG_IDENT_STRING, "\0"
+ .align 2 + + .globl enable_addr_trans +enable_addr_trans: + /* enable address translation */ + mfmsr r5 + ori r5, r5, (MSR_IR | MSR_DR) + mtmsr r5 + isync + blr + + .globl disable_addr_trans +disable_addr_trans: + /* disable address translation */ + mflr r4 + mfmsr r3 + andi. r0, r3, (MSR_IR | MSR_DR) + beqlr + andc r3, r3, r0 + mtspr SRR0, r4 + mtspr SRR1, r3 + rfi + + .globl get_pvr +get_pvr: + mfspr r3, PVR + blr + + .globl ppcDWstore +ppcDWstore: + lfd 1, 0(r4) + stfd 1, 0(r3) + blr + + .globl ppcDWload +ppcDWload: + lfd 1, 0(r3) + stfd 1, 0(r4) + blr
#ifndef CONFIG_DEFAULT_IMMR #error CONFIG_DEFAULT_IMMR must be defined @@ -697,27 +736,6 @@ setup_bats:
blr
- .globl enable_addr_trans -enable_addr_trans: - /* enable address translation */ - mfmsr r5 - ori r5, r5, (MSR_IR | MSR_DR) - mtmsr r5 - isync - blr - - .globl disable_addr_trans -disable_addr_trans: - /* disable address translation */ - mflr r4 - mfmsr r3 - andi. r0, r3, (MSR_IR | MSR_DR) - beqlr - andc r3, r3, r0 - mtspr SRR0, r4 - mtspr SRR1, r3 - rfi - /* Cache functions. * * Note: requires that all cache bits in @@ -795,23 +813,6 @@ flush_dcache: b 1b 2: blr
- .globl get_pvr -get_pvr: - mfspr r3, PVR - blr - - .globl ppcDWstore -ppcDWstore: - lfd 1, 0(r4) - stfd 1, 0(r3) - blr - - .globl ppcDWload -ppcDWload: - lfd 1, 0(r3) - stfd 1, 0(r4) - blr - /*-------------------------------------------------------------------*/
/*
Hi Ron,
Ron Madrid schrieb:
Currently there are in excess of 100 bytes located at the beginning of the image built by start.S that are not being utilized.
Hmmm, are you sure? What if someone designs a board, where the processor shall load its reset configuration from a local bus EEPROM, e.g. the same NOR-Flash containing the U-Boot image (CFG_RESET_SOURCE[0:2] = 000b?
Or did I misunderstand something?
Kind regards, Jens
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 08:26:03AM +0100, Jens Gehrlein wrote:
Hi Ron,
Ron Madrid schrieb:
Currently there are in excess of 100 bytes located at the beginning of the image built by start.S that are not being utilized.
Hmmm, are you sure? What if someone designs a board, where the processor shall load its reset configuration from a local bus EEPROM, e.g. the same NOR-Flash containing the U-Boot image (CFG_RESET_SOURCE[0:2] = 000b?
Or did I misunderstand something?
That's covered by the _HRCW_TABLE_ENTRY lines earlier in the file.
-Scott
Hi Scott,
Scott Wood schrieb:
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 08:26:03AM +0100, Jens Gehrlein wrote:
Hi Ron,
Ron Madrid schrieb:
Currently there are in excess of 100 bytes located at the beginning of the image built by start.S that are not being utilized.
Hmmm, are you sure? What if someone designs a board, where the processor shall load its reset configuration from a local bus EEPROM, e.g. the same NOR-Flash containing the U-Boot image (CFG_RESET_SOURCE[0:2] = 000b?
Or did I misunderstand something?
That's covered by the _HRCW_TABLE_ENTRY lines earlier in the file.
I see. I understood Ron's comment as "first 100 hex bytes". Thanks for the hint, Scott.
Kind regards, Jens
I haven't received any communication about this patch in a while. Is is still being looked at or did it slip through the cracks? Or did I miss an email?
Let me know.
Ron
--- On Fri, 12/12/08, Ron Madrid ron_madrid@sbcglobal.net wrote:
From: Ron Madrid ron_madrid@sbcglobal.net Subject: [PATCH] mpc83xx: Size optimization of start.S To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Cc: "Ron Madrid" ron_madrid@sbcglobal.net Date: Friday, December 12, 2008, 1:12 PM Currently there are in excess of 100 bytes located at the beginning of the image built by start.S that are not being utilized. This patch moves a few functions into this part of the image. This will create a greater number of *available* bytes that can be used by board specific code in NAND builds and will decrease the size of the assembled code in other builds.
Signed-off-by: Ron Madrid ron_madrid@sbcglobal.net
cpu/mpc83xx/start.S | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- 1 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:12:45 -0800 Ron Madrid ron_madrid@sbcglobal.net wrote:
Currently there are in excess of 100 bytes located at the beginning of the image built by start.S that are not being utilized. This patch moves a few functions into this part of the image. This will create a greater number of *available* bytes that can be used by board specific code in NAND builds and will decrease the size of the assembled code in other builds.
Signed-off-by: Ron Madrid ron_madrid@sbcglobal.net
applied to u-boot-mpc83xx next.
Thanks, and sorry for the delay,
Kim
No worries. With the holidays and all I figured that it was just delayed.
Since my new board patch is dependent on this being applied is it possible to now resubmit my new board patch?
Thanks.
Ron
--- On Wed, 1/21/09, Kim Phillips kim.phillips@freescale.com wrote:
From: Kim Phillips kim.phillips@freescale.com Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mpc83xx: Size optimization of start.S To: "Ron Madrid" ron_madrid@sbcglobal.net Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de Date: Wednesday, January 21, 2009, 4:55 PM On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:12:45 -0800 Ron Madrid ron_madrid@sbcglobal.net wrote:
Currently there are in excess of 100 bytes located at
the beginning of the image
built by start.S that are not being utilized. This
patch moves a few functions
into this part of the image. This will create a
greater number of *available*
bytes that can be used by board specific code in NAND
builds and will decrease
the size of the assembled code in other builds.
Signed-off-by: Ron Madrid
applied to u-boot-mpc83xx next.
Thanks, and sorry for the delay,
Kim
On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 10:00:56 -0800 (PST) Ron Madrid ron_madrid@sbcglobal.net wrote:
Since my new board patch is dependent on this being applied is it possible to now resubmit my new board patch?
I thought you'd never ask :)
please base it on u-boot-mpc83xx next.
Kim
Should this go to the main u-boot mail list or should I send it somewhere else?
Ron
--- On Thu, 1/22/09, Kim Phillips kim.phillips@freescale.com wrote:
From: Kim Phillips kim.phillips@freescale.com Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mpc83xx: Size optimization of start.S To: ron_madrid@sbcglobal.net Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de Date: Thursday, January 22, 2009, 10:37 AM On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 10:00:56 -0800 (PST) Ron Madrid ron_madrid@sbcglobal.net wrote:
Since my new board patch is dependent on this being
applied is it possible to now resubmit my new board patch?
I thought you'd never ask :)
please base it on u-boot-mpc83xx next.
Kim
On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 13:37:11 -0800 (PST) Ron Madrid ron_madrid@sbcglobal.net wrote:
Should this go to the main u-boot mail list or should I send it somewhere else?
? this list (the main u-boot ML) is where we review patches for all of u-boot.
Kim
p.s. please don't top-post. See http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
participants (4)
-
Jens Gehrlein -
Kim Phillips -
Ron Madrid -
Scott Wood