[U-Boot-Users] [RFD] move memsetup.S to CPU directory
Hi,
I would like to propose that we move the memsetup.S code from the board directories for the Innokom and CSB226 (soon also Gealog) plattform to the cpu/xscale directory.
- the code is absolutely generic, can be configured via CFG_ values - it has been cleaned up - I see no reason why it should not work on every PXA250 plattform - it would avoid code quadruplication ;) - the other board maintainers probably had to test it
Comments? Shall I submit a patch?
Robert
In message 20030506072640.GO2263@pengutronix.de you wrote:
I would like to propose that we move the memsetup.S code from the board directories for the Innokom and CSB226 (soon also Gealog) plattform to the cpu/xscale directory.
OK.
Comments? Shall I submit a patch?
Yes, please.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
On Tuesday 06 May 2003 03:26 am, Robert Schwebel wrote:
Hi,
I would like to propose that we move the memsetup.S code from the board directories for the Innokom and CSB226 (soon also Gealog) plattform to the cpu/xscale directory.
There are other Xscale CPUs. Is the memsetup.S generic enough to support them as well. I don't know the answer to this yet. I will be porting u-boot to IXP420 in the next few weeks and will have a better idea. Maybe someone else already knows.
Kyle.
On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 08:19:44AM -0400, Kyle Harris wrote:
There are other Xscale CPUs. Is the memsetup.S generic enough to support them as well. I don't know the answer to this yet. I will be porting u-boot to IXP420 in the next few weeks and will have a better idea. Maybe someone else already knows.
My impression is that at the moment everything that's labled "XScale" in u-boot is "PXA" in reality, so an audit has to be done anyway.
Do you have information about how the memory controller of the IXP is different from the PXAs?
Robert
On Tuesday 06 May 2003 08:35 am, Robert Schwebel wrote:
On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 08:19:44AM -0400, Kyle Harris wrote:
There are other Xscale CPUs. Is the memsetup.S generic enough to support them as well. I don't know the answer to this yet. I will be porting u-boot to IXP420 in the next few weeks and will have a better idea. Maybe someone else already knows.
My impression is that at the moment everything that's labled "XScale" in u-boot is "PXA" in reality, so an audit has to be done anyway.
Do you have information about how the memory controller of the IXP is different from the PXAs?
Actually, the mem controller is completely different. The IXP has separate SDRAM and expansion buses. Most other parts of cpu/xscale will be different as well (e.g., interrupt.c, serial.c). It may be that we need to have ixp and pxa subdirs. We can leave xscale (really pxa) as is, move memsetup there, and create a new ixp.
Kyle.
In message E19D26b-0003S5-00@smtp10.atl.mindspring.net you wrote:
Actually, the mem controller is completely different. The IXP has separate SDRAM and expansion buses. Most other parts of cpu/xscale will be different as well (e.g., interrupt.c, serial.c). It may be that we need to have ixp and pxa subdirs. We can leave xscale (really pxa) as is, move memsetup there, and create a new ixp.
Then let's rename xscale ==> pxa and add a new ixp directory
Wolfgang Denk
On Tuesday 06 May 2003 10:00 am, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
In message E19D26b-0003S5-00@smtp10.atl.mindspring.net you wrote:
Actually, the mem controller is completely different. The IXP has separate SDRAM and expansion buses. Most other parts of cpu/xscale will be different as well (e.g., interrupt.c, serial.c). It may be that we need to have ixp and pxa subdirs. We can leave xscale (really pxa) as is, move memsetup there, and create a new ixp.
Then let's rename xscale ==> pxa and add a new ixp directory
Yes, renaming xscale to pxa is the correct thing to do. It will be 2-3 weeks before I start the ixp port, though.
Kyle.
participants (3)
-
Kyle Harris -
Robert Schwebel -
Wolfgang Denk