Dear Tiur,

in message 46BF39E1.2010904@freescale.com you wrote:

...

•   puts ("Initializing\n");
    msize = fixed_sdram ();
  

•   puts ("   DDR RAM: ");
  
    return msize;
  

}

Kim is really the one to be answering this, but I'll chime in since I'm reading email now.

I'm all for making 83xx more like other boards where it makes sense. Unfortunately, I am personally not really aware of what other boards do, or what the U-Boot norm is, so I would need to be told on a case-by-case basis what is different about 83xx.

Can you please restrict your line length to some 70 characters or so? Thanks.

U-Boot "norm" is that the common framework will print "DRAM: " before it starts the memory sizing and testing, and the size it found once that completed. That makes some nicely aligned output like here:

CPU: MPC5200 v1.2, Core v1.1 at 396 MHz Bus 132 MHz, IPB 132 MHz, PCI 66 MHz Board: TQM5200 (TQ-Components GmbH) on a STK52xx carrier board I2C: 85 kHz, ready DRAM: 64 MB FLASH: 32 MB In: serial Out: serial Err: serial

In the code above, "Initializing\n" and " DDR RAM: " strings break this; then it looks like this:

CPU: MPC5121e rev. 1.0, Core e300c4 at 264 MHz, CSB at 132 MHz Board: ADS5121 rev. 0x0001 (CPLD rev. 0x03) Watchdog enabled I2C: ready DRAM: Initializing DDR RAM: 256 MB FLASH: 64 MB In: serial Out: serial Err: serial

This looks not only ugly, but the "Initializing" and "DDR RAM:" strings also don't add any new information, so let's get rid of these.

...

I think something like this should be applied toi the following files:

board/sbc8349/sbc8349.c board/mpc832xemds/mpc832xemds.c board/mpc8360emds/mpc8360emds.c board/freescale/mpc8323erdb/mpc8323erdb.c board/mpc8349itx/mpc8349itx.c board/mpc8349emds/mpc8349emds.c board/mpc8313erdb/sdram.c

Also, if I understand this correctly, these files use a hardwired memory size. I this correct?

I think so. There is a define for the memory size, but off the top of my head, I think it's only use to saw the LAWBAR.

...

Do you have any plans to bring this in line with the normal U-Boot design philisophy which uses the memsize() function to automatically detect and adjust for the size of memory really present on a board, allowing to use the same image on differing configurations?

I don't know of any plans, but then, I didn't know it was a problem.

It is not a problem in terms of malfunction, but it violates the design rules, and there is IMHO no good reason to give up the flexibility that's built into U-boot here. Also, the memory size function serves as a very simple but prettu efficient memory test that will help to detect 95% of all typical RAM related manufacturing problems. When U-Boot prints "DRAM: 0 MB" you know exactly where to look at.

See also http://www.denx.de/wiki/UBoot/DesignPrinciples

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

Dear Kim,

in message 20070813135529.2e92d4ea.kim.phillips@freescale.com you wrote:

I can abbreviate the above to have the entire DRAM line show something like "DRAM: 64-bit, ECC off, 256MB\n". Let me know if you have objections.

Looks good to me.

...

line with the normal U-Boot design philisophy which uses the memsize() function to automatically detect and adjust for the size of memory really present on a board, allowing to use the same image on differing configurations?

Thanks for the info. Some boards have fixed mem, some don't, but in either case I'll have to add this to my TODOLIST.

Even with fixed memory size the use of memsize() is often a food idea, as it perorms some basic memory testing (see my previous message to Timur).

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk