| Message ID | 20170422065048.8617-5-lokeshvutla@ti.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Delegated to: | Tom Rini |
| Headers | show |
On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 12:20:46PM +0530, Lokesh Vutla wrote: > Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@ti.com> > --- > board/ti/am335x/board.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/board/ti/am335x/board.c b/board/ti/am335x/board.c > index 3e842d3187..566183e669 100644 > --- a/board/ti/am335x/board.c > +++ b/board/ti/am335x/board.c > @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ > */ > > #include <common.h> > +#include <dm.h> > #include <errno.h> > #include <spl.h> > #include <serial.h> > @@ -26,6 +27,7 @@ > #include <asm/emif.h> > #include <asm/gpio.h> > #include <asm/omap_sec_common.h> > +#include <asm/omap_mmc.h> > #include <i2c.h> > #include <miiphy.h> > #include <cpsw.h> > @@ -892,3 +894,33 @@ void board_fit_image_post_process(void **p_image, size_t *p_size) > secure_boot_verify_image(p_image, p_size); > } > #endif > + > +#if !CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_CONTROL) > +static const struct omap_hsmmc_plat am335x_mmc0_platdata = { > + .base_addr = (struct hsmmc *)0x48060000, OK. So, off the top of my head, from Adam's series about converting omap3, OMAP_HSMMC1_BASE and company aren't defined correctly? Or we're playing games with that 0x100 offset? I bring this up as since we have defines for these base addresses already, we should make use of them, but in this case first we'll have to do... something, yes?
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 4:10 PM, Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 12:20:46PM +0530, Lokesh Vutla wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@ti.com> >> --- >> board/ti/am335x/board.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/board/ti/am335x/board.c b/board/ti/am335x/board.c >> index 3e842d3187..566183e669 100644 >> --- a/board/ti/am335x/board.c >> +++ b/board/ti/am335x/board.c >> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ >> */ >> >> #include <common.h> >> +#include <dm.h> >> #include <errno.h> >> #include <spl.h> >> #include <serial.h> >> @@ -26,6 +27,7 @@ >> #include <asm/emif.h> >> #include <asm/gpio.h> >> #include <asm/omap_sec_common.h> >> +#include <asm/omap_mmc.h> >> #include <i2c.h> >> #include <miiphy.h> >> #include <cpsw.h> >> @@ -892,3 +894,33 @@ void board_fit_image_post_process(void **p_image, size_t *p_size) >> secure_boot_verify_image(p_image, p_size); >> } >> #endif >> + >> +#if !CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_CONTROL) >> +static const struct omap_hsmmc_plat am335x_mmc0_platdata = { >> + .base_addr = (struct hsmmc *)0x48060000, > > OK. So, off the top of my head, from Adam's series about converting > omap3, OMAP_HSMMC1_BASE and company aren't defined correctly? Or we're > playing games with that 0x100 offset? I bring this up as since we have > defines for these base addresses already, we should make use of them, > but in this case first we'll have to do... something, yes? > The base address for the AM335xx he has listed is correct at 0x480600, however the offset is 0x100. Without without my patch I would expect this to correctly. SYSCONFIG is at offset 0x110 and for OMAP3 the offset would be 0x10. His patch looks like it supports the condition without OF_CONTROL, so maybe using a #define here would be appropriate, however without OF_CONFIG, I am guessing my patch would break stuff. I only did my series to eliminate the #ifdef stuff, but we might have to add something like && !define (OF_CONTROL) to my series. If you want to pull his in, I can rebase and resubmit my series against his. I don't have an AM33xx or OMAP4+ to test, I only have a DM3730 to test. adam > -- > Tom > > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot@lists.denx.de > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot >
Hi Adam, On Wednesday 26 April 2017 05:35 AM, Adam Ford wrote: > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 4:10 PM, Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> wrote: >> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 12:20:46PM +0530, Lokesh Vutla wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@ti.com> >>> --- >>> board/ti/am335x/board.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/board/ti/am335x/board.c b/board/ti/am335x/board.c >>> index 3e842d3187..566183e669 100644 >>> --- a/board/ti/am335x/board.c >>> +++ b/board/ti/am335x/board.c >>> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ >>> */ >>> >>> #include <common.h> >>> +#include <dm.h> >>> #include <errno.h> >>> #include <spl.h> >>> #include <serial.h> >>> @@ -26,6 +27,7 @@ >>> #include <asm/emif.h> >>> #include <asm/gpio.h> >>> #include <asm/omap_sec_common.h> >>> +#include <asm/omap_mmc.h> >>> #include <i2c.h> >>> #include <miiphy.h> >>> #include <cpsw.h> >>> @@ -892,3 +894,33 @@ void board_fit_image_post_process(void **p_image, size_t *p_size) >>> secure_boot_verify_image(p_image, p_size); >>> } >>> #endif >>> + >>> +#if !CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_CONTROL) >>> +static const struct omap_hsmmc_plat am335x_mmc0_platdata = { >>> + .base_addr = (struct hsmmc *)0x48060000, >> >> OK. So, off the top of my head, from Adam's series about converting >> omap3, OMAP_HSMMC1_BASE and company aren't defined correctly? Or we're >> playing games with that 0x100 offset? I bring this up as since we have >> defines for these base addresses already, we should make use of them, >> but in this case first we'll have to do... something, yes? >> > > The base address for the AM335xx he has listed is correct at 0x480600, > however the offset is 0x100. Without without my patch I would expect > this to correctly. SYSCONFIG is at offset 0x110 and for OMAP3 the > offset would be 0x10. His patch looks like it supports the condition > without OF_CONTROL, so maybe using a #define here would be > appropriate, however without OF_CONFIG, I am guessing my patch would > break stuff. Your patch[1] definitely make sense and this is how it is handled in kernel as well. Please keep it as is. Ill re-base this series on top of your series and send a v2. [1] http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/751300/ Thanks and regards, Lokesh
diff --git a/board/ti/am335x/board.c b/board/ti/am335x/board.c index 3e842d3187..566183e669 100644 --- a/board/ti/am335x/board.c +++ b/board/ti/am335x/board.c @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ */ #include <common.h> +#include <dm.h> #include <errno.h> #include <spl.h> #include <serial.h> @@ -26,6 +27,7 @@ #include <asm/emif.h> #include <asm/gpio.h> #include <asm/omap_sec_common.h> +#include <asm/omap_mmc.h> #include <i2c.h> #include <miiphy.h> #include <cpsw.h> @@ -892,3 +894,33 @@ void board_fit_image_post_process(void **p_image, size_t *p_size) secure_boot_verify_image(p_image, p_size); } #endif + +#if !CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_CONTROL) +static const struct omap_hsmmc_plat am335x_mmc0_platdata = { + .base_addr = (struct hsmmc *)0x48060000, + .cfg.host_caps = MMC_MODE_HS_52MHz | MMC_MODE_HS | MMC_MODE_4BIT, + .cfg.f_min = 400000, + .cfg.f_max = 52000000, + .cfg.voltages = MMC_VDD_32_33 | MMC_VDD_33_34 | MMC_VDD_165_195, + .cfg.b_max = CONFIG_SYS_MMC_MAX_BLK_COUNT, +}; + +U_BOOT_DEVICE(am335x_mmc0) = { + .name = "omap_hsmmc", + .platdata = &am335x_mmc0_platdata, +}; + +static const struct omap_hsmmc_plat am335x_mmc1_platdata = { + .base_addr = (struct hsmmc *)0x481d8000, + .cfg.host_caps = MMC_MODE_HS_52MHz | MMC_MODE_HS | MMC_MODE_8BIT, + .cfg.f_min = 400000, + .cfg.f_max = 52000000, + .cfg.voltages = MMC_VDD_32_33 | MMC_VDD_33_34 | MMC_VDD_165_195, + .cfg.b_max = CONFIG_SYS_MMC_MAX_BLK_COUNT, +}; + +U_BOOT_DEVICE(am335x_mmc1) = { + .name = "omap_hsmmc", + .platdata = &am335x_mmc1_platdata, +}; +#endif
Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@ti.com> --- board/ti/am335x/board.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)