[U-Boot] i.MX8M layout, rephrased
I'm looking at U-Boot master tree and u-boot-imx repository. What we have now is quite a mess for i.MX8M.
In master we have the following directories:
arch/arm/mach-imx/imx8 arch/arm/mach-imx/mx8m
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-imx8 arch/arm/include/asm/arch-mx8m
In u-boot-imx it is different:
arch/arm/mach-imx/imx8 arch/arm/mach-imx/imx8m (vs ../mx8m in master)
arch/arm/include/asm/arch/arch-imx8 arch/arm/include/asm/arch/arch-imx8m (vs ../mx8m in master)
The question is which one is going to make it in the master tree?
The problem here is that files from those directories are referenced in multiple places and the "imx8m"/"mx8m" is all over in the header files and sources so once we decided on either naming one tree would have to make a lot of changes either adding or removing that 'i' before "mx8m".
Can anybody responsible tell _WHICH_ one is going to make it into the main source tree? Would it be better if we decide on it sooner than later (i.e. _NOW_) so we won't have to hunt it all over the tree later on?
I assume it should be "mx8m" as it is in master tree following suit for other flavors so it is u-boot-imx tree that has to be fixed.
Another issue is that ARCH_IMX8 and ARCH_IMX8M are treated as different ARCHITECTURES in u-boot-imx unlike e.g. IMX6 that is treated as one ARCH with different flavors (SX/DL/Q/whatever). That makes a lot of unnecessary confusion and, IMHO, should be somehow cleaned up to make it consistent.
Can anybody tell something on this? Any thoughts, ideas, recomendations?
--- ****************************************************************** * KSI@home KOI8 Net < > The impossible we do immediately. * * Las Vegas NV, USA < > Miracles require 24-hour notice. * ******************************************************************
On Mon, 17 Dec 2018, Sergey Kubushyn wrote:
Yet another thought -- maybe it's time to move all 64-bit ARM stuff to its own arch/arm64 as it is in Linux kernel since I don't remember when? There are quite a few SoCs out there to justify such a move...
I'm looking at U-Boot master tree and u-boot-imx repository. What we have now is quite a mess for i.MX8M.
In master we have the following directories:
arch/arm/mach-imx/imx8 arch/arm/mach-imx/mx8m arch/arm/include/asm/arch-imx8 arch/arm/include/asm/arch-mx8mIn u-boot-imx it is different:
arch/arm/mach-imx/imx8 arch/arm/mach-imx/imx8m (vs ../mx8m in master) arch/arm/include/asm/arch/arch-imx8 arch/arm/include/asm/arch/arch-imx8m (vs ../mx8m in master)The question is which one is going to make it in the master tree?
The problem here is that files from those directories are referenced in multiple places and the "imx8m"/"mx8m" is all over in the header files and sources so once we decided on either naming one tree would have to make a lot of changes either adding or removing that 'i' before "mx8m".
Can anybody responsible tell _WHICH_ one is going to make it into the main source tree? Would it be better if we decide on it sooner than later (i.e. _NOW_) so we won't have to hunt it all over the tree later on?
I assume it should be "mx8m" as it is in master tree following suit for other flavors so it is u-boot-imx tree that has to be fixed.
Another issue is that ARCH_IMX8 and ARCH_IMX8M are treated as different ARCHITECTURES in u-boot-imx unlike e.g. IMX6 that is treated as one ARCH with different flavors (SX/DL/Q/whatever). That makes a lot of unnecessary confusion and, IMHO, should be somehow cleaned up to make it consistent.
Can anybody tell something on this? Any thoughts, ideas, recomendations?
--- ****************************************************************** * KSI@home KOI8 Net < > The impossible we do immediately. * * Las Vegas NV, USA < > Miracles require 24-hour notice. * ******************************************************************
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 07:14:02PM -0800, Sergey Kubushyn wrote:
On Mon, 17 Dec 2018, Sergey Kubushyn wrote:
Yet another thought -- maybe it's time to move all 64-bit ARM stuff to its own arch/arm64 as it is in Linux kernel since I don't remember when? There are quite a few SoCs out there to justify such a move...
No, we don't want to split ARMv8 out from arch/arm. In Linux the split was done to leave a large amount of legacy decisions behind (similar to how there was arch/i386 and arch/x86_64 and is now just arch/x86) which we do not want/need to do.
On Wed, 26 Dec 2018, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 07:14:02PM -0800, Sergey Kubushyn wrote:
On Mon, 17 Dec 2018, Sergey Kubushyn wrote:
Yet another thought -- maybe it's time to move all 64-bit ARM stuff to its own arch/arm64 as it is in Linux kernel since I don't remember when? There are quite a few SoCs out there to justify such a move...
No, we don't want to split ARMv8 out from arch/arm. In Linux the split was done to leave a large amount of legacy decisions behind (similar to how there was arch/i386 and arch/x86_64 and is now just arch/x86) which we do not want/need to do.
OK, so is it going to be IMX8M or MX8M?
--- ****************************************************************** * KSI@home KOI8 Net < > The impossible we do immediately. * * Las Vegas NV, USA < > Miracles require 24-hour notice. * ******************************************************************
On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 7:18 PM Sergey Kubushyn ksi@koi8.net wrote:
OK, so is it going to be IMX8M or MX8M?
Peng has already replied. It is going to be IMX8M: http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot/u-boot-imx.git;a=commitdiff;h=3d145ff59d183850f...
On Wed, 26 Dec 2018, Fabio Estevam wrote:
On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 7:18 PM Sergey Kubushyn ksi@koi8.net wrote:
OK, so is it going to be IMX8M or MX8M?
Peng has already replied. It is going to be IMX8M: http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot/u-boot-imx.git;a=commitdiff;h=3d145ff59d183850f...
OK, thanks. That's what I picked so won't have to re-do it again :)
BTW I somehow missed Peng's reply, never received that email.
--- ****************************************************************** * KSI@home KOI8 Net < > The impossible we do immediately. * * Las Vegas NV, USA < > Miracles require 24-hour notice. * ******************************************************************
Hi Sergey,
-----Original Message----- From: U-Boot [mailto:u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Sergey Kubushyn Sent: 2018年12月18日 9:54 To: U-Boot list u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: [U-Boot] i.MX8M layout, rephrased
I'm looking at U-Boot master tree and u-boot-imx repository. What we have now is quite a mess for i.MX8M.
In master we have the following directories:
arch/arm/mach-imx/imx8 arch/arm/mach-imx/mx8m
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-imx8 arch/arm/include/asm/arch-mx8m
In u-boot-imx it is different:
arch/arm/mach-imx/imx8 arch/arm/mach-imx/imx8m (vs ../mx8m in master)
arch/arm/include/asm/arch/arch-imx8 arch/arm/include/asm/arch/arch-imx8m (vs ../mx8m in master)
The question is which one is going to make it in the master tree?
i.MX8/8X/8M are 3 soc families. i.MX8/8X share similar architecture, so code mostly under imx8 or arch-imx8
i.MX8MQ/MM share similar architecture, so code mostly under imx8m or arch-imx8m.
The problem here is that files from those directories are referenced in multiple places and the "imx8m"/"mx8m" is all over in the header files and sources so once we decided on either naming one tree would have to make a lot of changes either adding or removing that 'i' before "mx8m".
For newer i.MX SoCs, we will add the "i" to represent i.MX brand.
Can anybody responsible tell _WHICH_ one is going to make it into the main source tree? Would it be better if we decide on it sooner than later (i.e. _NOW_) so we won't have to hunt it all over the tree later on?
I assume it should be "mx8m" as it is in master tree following suit for other flavors so it is u-boot-imx tree that has to be fixed.
http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot/u-boot-imx.git;a=commit;h=3d145ff59d183850f11ba... imx tree has switch to imx8m, and the patch will be merged to master tree, so the master will also switch to imx8m.
Another issue is that ARCH_IMX8 and ARCH_IMX8M are treated as different ARCHITECTURES in u-boot-imx unlike e.g. IMX6 that is treated as one ARCH with different flavors (SX/DL/Q/whatever). That makes a lot of unnecessary confusion and, IMHO, should be somehow cleaned up to make it consistent.
IMX8 and IMX8M uses totally different architecture.
Regards, Peng.
Can anybody tell something on this? Any thoughts, ideas, recomendations?
- KSI@home KOI8 Net < > The impossible we do immediately. *
- Las Vegas NV, USA < > Miracles require 24-hour notice. *
U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists. denx.de%2Flistinfo%2Fu-boot&data=02%7C01%7CPeng.Fan%40nxp.co m%7Cf91122ecf133487aa45608d6648bc117%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99 c5c301635%7C0%7C0%7C636806948762235491&sdata=202DqjIQfSABs BtuLUN0QvbhadrtMP61mGnmH1QMUpI%3D&reserved=0
participants (4)
-
Fabio Estevam -
Peng Fan -
Sergey Kubushyn -
Tom Rini