[U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM Cortex A8: Move OMAP3 specific reset handler to OMAP3 code
Reset is SoC specific and not ARM Cortex A8 generic. Move it from generic code to OMAP3 SoC specific file.
CC: "Kim, Heung Jun" riverful@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme dirk.behme@googlemail.com
---
This patches fixes the second issue found by riverful in
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/053433.html
The first issue is fixed by
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/053444.html
cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S | 12 ++++++++++++ cpu/arm_cortexa8/start.S | 14 -------------- 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
Index: u-boot-arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S =================================================================== --- u-boot-arm.orig/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S +++ u-boot-arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S @@ -181,6 +181,18 @@ lowlevel_init: /* back to arch calling code */ mov pc, lr
+.global reset_cpu +reset_cpu: + ldr r1, rstctl @ get addr for global reset + @ reg + mov r3, #0x2 @ full reset pll + mpu + str r3, [r1] @ force reset + mov r0, r0 +_loop_forever: + b _loop_forever +rstctl: + .word PRM_RSTCTRL + /* the literal pools origin */ .ltorg
Index: u-boot-arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/start.S =================================================================== --- u-boot-arm.orig/cpu/arm_cortexa8/start.S +++ u-boot-arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/start.S @@ -500,17 +500,3 @@ finished_inval: @ but we compile with armv5
ldmfd r13!, {r0 - r5, r7, r9 - r12, pc} - - - .align 5 -.global reset_cpu -reset_cpu: - ldr r1, rstctl @ get addr for global reset - @ reg - mov r3, #0x2 @ full reset pll + mpu - str r3, [r1] @ force reset - mov r0, r0 -_loop_forever: - b _loop_forever -rstctl: - .word PRM_RSTCTRL
On 09:30 Sat 30 May , Dirk Behme wrote:
Reset is SoC specific and not ARM Cortex A8 generic. Move it from generic code to OMAP3 SoC specific file.
CC: "Kim, Heung Jun" riverful@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme dirk.behme@googlemail.com
This patches fixes the second issue found by riverful in
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/053433.html
The first issue is fixed by
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/053444.html
cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S | 12 ++++++++++++ cpu/arm_cortexa8/start.S | 14 -------------- 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
Index: u-boot-arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S
--- u-boot-arm.orig/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S +++ u-boot-arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S @@ -181,6 +181,18 @@ lowlevel_init: /* back to arch calling code */ mov pc, lr
+.global reset_cpu +reset_cpu:
- ldr r1, rstctl @ get addr for global reset
@ reg- mov r3, #0x2 @ full reset pll + mpu
- str r3, [r1] @ force reset
- mov r0, r0
+_loop_forever:
- b _loop_forever
+rstctl:
- .word PRM_RSTCTRL
please move this to reset.S other wise fine
Best Regards, J.
Dear Jean-Christophe,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
On 09:30 Sat 30 May , Dirk Behme wrote:
Reset is SoC specific and not ARM Cortex A8 generic. Move it from generic code to OMAP3 SoC specific file.
CC: "Kim, Heung Jun" riverful@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme dirk.behme@googlemail.com
This patches fixes the second issue found by riverful in
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/053433.html
The first issue is fixed by
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/053444.html
cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S | 12 ++++++++++++ cpu/arm_cortexa8/start.S | 14 -------------- 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
Index: u-boot-arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S
--- u-boot-arm.orig/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S +++ u-boot-arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S @@ -181,6 +181,18 @@ lowlevel_init: /* back to arch calling code */ mov pc, lr
+.global reset_cpu +reset_cpu:
- ldr r1, rstctl @ get addr for global reset
@ reg- mov r3, #0x2 @ full reset pll + mpu
- str r3, [r1] @ force reset
- mov r0, r0
+_loop_forever:
- b _loop_forever
+rstctl:
- .word PRM_RSTCTRL
please move this to reset.S other wise fine
Most probably your idea is that each file should only contain functionality which fits 100% (120%?) what the file name implies (?). While from general point of view this is correct, it makes no sense to create new files again and again just to follow this rule. We already created a cache.c on your request, now you request a new file reset.S for ~5 assembly lines. This new file would contain more comments (e.g. GPL header) than useful code.
So while in general case having file names reflecting more or less the functionality in these files, in this case it doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense to pollute the source tree with a new file containing ~5 assembly lines just to make your rules apply. For such small code, re-using existing file is the better way to go. So NACK in this case.
Best regards
Dirk
Dear Jean & Dirk,
Jean's opinion seems that file naming & func naming must match for soruce maintaining, & definitely I agree with that. Moreover it's a very first time to implement the new arm_cortexa8 code for u-boot source. So, the matching works is needed.
On the other hand, Dirk's opinion seems that it dosen't make sense in this case, if there is many files when the developer make the code. I think that too, especially when the code is a little simple like the boot code. The u-boot's architecture & SoC directory tree is already brilliant, so it's alright we just look at this directories what arch & SoC ever we develop.
So, my opinions is re-using the files seems to be right in this case. the Dirk's patch code is not difficult to understand & use. After the code polluted cause of not-matching the file & func naming, I believe that the developers seem be able to fix this issue easily, like my case.
BTW, when am I able to re-update my new patch?? I wanna do that :)
Best Regards, riverful
2009/6/1 Dirk Behme dirk.behme@googlemail.com:
Dear Jean-Christophe,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
On 09:30 Sat 30 May , Dirk Behme wrote:
Reset is SoC specific and not ARM Cortex A8 generic. Move it from generic code to OMAP3 SoC specific file.
CC: "Kim, Heung Jun" riverful@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme dirk.behme@googlemail.com
This patches fixes the second issue found by riverful in
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/053433.html
The first issue is fixed by
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/053444.html
cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S | 12 ++++++++++++ cpu/arm_cortexa8/start.S | 14 -------------- 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
Index: u-boot-arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S
--- u-boot-arm.orig/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S +++ u-boot-arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S @@ -181,6 +181,18 @@ lowlevel_init: /* back to arch calling code */ mov pc, lr
+.global reset_cpu +reset_cpu:
- ldr r1, rstctl @ get addr for global reset
- @ reg
- mov r3, #0x2 @ full reset pll + mpu
- str r3, [r1] @ force reset
- mov r0, r0
+_loop_forever:
- b _loop_forever
+rstctl:
- .word PRM_RSTCTRL
please move this to reset.S other wise fine
Most probably your idea is that each file should only contain functionality which fits 100% (120%?) what the file name implies (?). While from general point of view this is correct, it makes no sense to create new files again and again just to follow this rule. We already created a cache.c on your request, now you request a new file reset.S for ~5 assembly lines. This new file would contain more comments (e.g. GPL header) than useful code.
So while in general case having file names reflecting more or less the functionality in these files, in this case it doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense to pollute the source tree with a new file containing ~5 assembly lines just to make your rules apply. For such small code, re-using existing file is the better way to go. So NACK in this case.
Best regards
Dirk
U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Dear Riverful,
In message b64afca20906010014r321bd3fas3539d97f6667e70d@mail.gmail.com you wrote:
Jean's opinion seems that file naming & func naming must match for soruce maintaining, & definitely I agree with that.
I do not agree.
Yes, they _should_ match. That means we should try to acchieve this whenever it makes sense.
But there is no strict must that we need to create a new source file for each and every function. Maintaining tons of tiny files does not make much sense either.
In this case, I agree with Dirk that splitting of a new source file for a small (10 lines or so including comments) function is overkill.
Jean-Christiphe sent a note about this code, and Dirk probvided a reasonable explanation why the code was written as is.
I think that should be enough in this case. From my point of view, the code can go in as is.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
On 17:56 Sun 31 May , Dirk Behme wrote:
Dear Jean-Christophe,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
On 09:30 Sat 30 May , Dirk Behme wrote:
Reset is SoC specific and not ARM Cortex A8 generic. Move it from generic code to OMAP3 SoC specific file.
CC: "Kim, Heung Jun" riverful@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme dirk.behme@googlemail.com
This patches fixes the second issue found by riverful in
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/053433.html
The first issue is fixed by
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/053444.html
cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S | 12 ++++++++++++ cpu/arm_cortexa8/start.S | 14 -------------- 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
Index: u-boot-arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S
--- u-boot-arm.orig/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S +++ u-boot-arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S @@ -181,6 +181,18 @@ lowlevel_init: /* back to arch calling code */ mov pc, lr +.global reset_cpu +reset_cpu:
- ldr r1, rstctl @ get addr for global reset
@ reg- mov r3, #0x2 @ full reset pll + mpu
- str r3, [r1] @ force reset
- mov r0, r0
+_loop_forever:
- b _loop_forever
+rstctl:
- .word PRM_RSTCTRL
please move this to reset.S other wise fine
Most probably your idea is that each file should only contain functionality which fits 100% (120%?) what the file name implies (?). While from general point of view this is correct, it makes no sense to create new files again and again just to follow this rule. We already created a cache.c on your request, now you request a new file reset.S for ~5 assembly lines. This new file would contain more comments (e.g. GPL header) than useful code.
the idea is different here I want to have only code in lowlevel_init.S that can be disable by CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT and do it via Makefile
Best Regards, J.
Dear Jean-Christophe,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
On 17:56 Sun 31 May , Dirk Behme wrote:
Dear Jean-Christophe,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
On 09:30 Sat 30 May , Dirk Behme wrote:
Reset is SoC specific and not ARM Cortex A8 generic. Move it from generic code to OMAP3 SoC specific file.
CC: "Kim, Heung Jun" riverful@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme dirk.behme@googlemail.com
This patches fixes the second issue found by riverful in
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/053433.html
The first issue is fixed by
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/053444.html
cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S | 12 ++++++++++++ cpu/arm_cortexa8/start.S | 14 -------------- 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
Index: u-boot-arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S
--- u-boot-arm.orig/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S +++ u-boot-arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/lowlevel_init.S @@ -181,6 +181,18 @@ lowlevel_init: /* back to arch calling code */ mov pc, lr +.global reset_cpu +reset_cpu:
- ldr r1, rstctl @ get addr for global reset
@ reg- mov r3, #0x2 @ full reset pll + mpu
- str r3, [r1] @ force reset
- mov r0, r0
+_loop_forever:
- b _loop_forever
+rstctl:
- .word PRM_RSTCTRL
please move this to reset.S other wise fine
Most probably your idea is that each file should only contain functionality which fits 100% (120%?) what the file name implies (?). While from general point of view this is correct, it makes no sense to create new files again and again just to follow this rule. We already created a cache.c on your request, now you request a new file reset.S for ~5 assembly lines. This new file would contain more comments (e.g. GPL header) than useful code.
the idea is different here I want to have only code in lowlevel_init.S that can be disable by CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT and do it via Makefile
Looking at recent OMAP3 lowlevel_init.S most probably some other stuff has to be moved to make this work, too. So for the moment, the cleanest way is to move above reset_cpu to low_levelinit.S. And then later, after thorough investigation and testing, move the stuff needed for your idea to an appropriate place. This move will be consistent then and will avoid polluting source tree with unnecessary files until then.
So let's do it in two steps:
a) Now, move reset_cpu to lowlevel_init.S so that Riverful can go on with his work
b) Later, move everything necessary in one consistent patch set while you implement your "CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT via Makefile" idea
Best regards
Dirk
participants (4)
-
Dirk Behme -
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD -
Kim, Heung Jun -
Wolfgang Denk