[U-Boot] [PATCH] Kirkwood: Add support for Ka-Ro TK71

[Prafulla Wadaskar]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Holger Brunck [mailto:holger.brunck at keymile.com]
> Sent: 04 June 2012 21:50
> To: Prafulla Wadaskar
> Cc: Valentin Longchamp; Marek Vasut; u-boot at lists.denx.de
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Kirkwood: Add support for Ka-Ro TK71
> 
> On 06/04/2012 05:46 PM, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Valentin Longchamp [mailto:valentin.longchamp at keymile.com]
> >> Sent: 04 June 2012 21:07
> >> To: Marek Vasut
> >> Cc: Prafulla Wadaskar; u-boot at lists.denx.de; Holger Brunck
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Kirkwood: Add support for Ka-Ro TK71
> >>
> >> Hi Marek and Prafulla,
> >>
> >> On 06/01/2012 03:03 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>> Dear Prafulla Wadaskar,
> >>>
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>> From: Marek Vasut [mailto:marex at denx.de]
> >>>>> Sent: 31 May 2012 16:37
> >>>>> To: u-boot at lists.denx.de
> >>>>> Cc: Marek Vasut; Prafulla Wadaskar; Wolfgang Denk
> >>>>> Subject: [PATCH] Kirkwood: Add support for Ka-Ro TK71
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex at denx.de>
> >>>>> Cc: Prafulla Wadaskar <prafulla at marvell.com>
> >>>>> Cc: Wolfgang Denk <wd at denx.de>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  board/karo/tk71/Makefile         |   45 ++++++++++
> >>>>>  board/karo/tk71/kwbimage-256.cfg |  174
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  board/karo/tk71/kwbimage-512.cfg |  174
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>
> >>>> Dear Marek
> >>>> Just for DRAM size change do not add one more cfg file, configure
> >> by
> >>>> default 256MB of RAM in default kwbimg.cfg file and in function
> >>>> board_early_init_f() tune it to 512 for your other board version.
> >>>
> >>> There's only one single bit flipped between those two kwb configs.
> >> Do you think
> >>> it'd work if we just configured the system for 512MB RAM and ran
> >> get_ram_size()
> >>> to see if it has only 256MB? That'd eliminate two board entries
> for
> >> this tk71.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I would like to have your advice on this as well Prafulla.
> >>
> >> We have tested this on km_arm (we will have the same boards with
> 1/2
> >> the RAM
> >> size) and with the above get_ram_size() it works as expected.
> >>
> >> We still should, however, at some point (board_early_init_f() is a
> >> good
> >> candidate) then reduce the corresponding RAM CS size (reg @1504 for
> >> CS0 so that
> >> the window is the same size as what was detected by get_ram_size).
> >> What do you
> >> guys think ?
> >
> > Dear Valentin
> > Yes, we should use this method. That's why I always ask if one can
> reuse any existing kwbimage.cfg.
> >
> > It makes no sense to add one more file of 250 lines just for one or
> two difference/s that can be handled through board_early_init_f().
> >
> 
> but how should this work for kwbimabe.cfg files for images which will
> be
> downloaded via serial terminal and the runs directly from RAM. This
> patch is
> related to this topic:
> http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2012-May/124802.html
> 
> In this case we change already the *.kwb in that way that we can
> download it
> directly into RAM and execute it directly from there. Isn't it
> mandatory for
> this usecase to have the exact RAM size specified in u-boot.kwb ? If
> so the
> above approach would not work, or we enhance the kwboot tool proposed
> in the
> patch with an additional commandline argument for the ramsize.

In theory one common kwbimage.cfg should be used by both methods (boot from UART and boot from media)

Currently kwbimage.cfg embeds boot option, it can be abstracted and u-boot.kwb can be prepared for boot from UART or boot from media (flash). This can be addressed through u-boot.kwb target generation ( mkimage tool is not mandatory).

Whereas u-boot.kwb prepared for UART can be fetched by said tool into RAM by Kirkwood and will be executed in the same way (as it fetches and executes from flash)

Regards..
Prafulla . . .