[U-Boot] [PATCH v2] x86: Clean up the FSP support codes

[Bin Meng]

Hi Simon,

On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> Hi Bin,
>
> On 16 December 2014 at 20:12, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Simon,
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
>>> Hi Bin,
>>>
>>> On 15 December 2014 at 08:03, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> This is the follow-on patch to clean up the FSP support codes:
>>>>
>>>> - Remove the _t suffix on the structures defines
>>>> - Use U-Boot's assert()
>>>> - Use standard bool true/false
>>>> - Remove read_unaligned64()
>>>> - Use memcmp() in the compare_guid()
>>>> - Remove the cast in the memset() call
>>>> - Replace some magic numbers with macros
>>>> - Use panic() when no valid FSP image header is found
>>>> - Change some FSP utility routines to use an fsp_ prefix
>>>> - Add comment blocks for asm_continuation and fsp_init_done
>>>> - Add comments to mention find_fsp_header() may be called in a
>>>>   stackless environment
>>>> - Add comments to mention init(&params) in fsp_init() cannot
>>>>   be removed
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com>
>>>
>>> This looks pretty good to me now. I've got a few more comments that
>>> you can hopefully roll into your final version.
>>>
>>> Also I've pushed some updates to u-boot-x86.git branch 'working'.
>>> Patches 2-7 are the v2 series I just send. Can send a series that
>>> incorporates those, or put them as your base, perhaps dropping or
>>> squashing the 'Convert microcode format' patch then resend your
>>> series? Everything up to your microcode patch is applied to x86/master
>>> now.
>>
>> I will rebase my remaining patches on top of u-boot-x86/master and
>> send the patches soon.
>
> Thanks - also I just sent v3 of the microcode script.

Yep, I see that, will do some test on the v3.

>>
>>> Then I will retest and push.
>>>
>>> BTW I wonder if your series would work with Minnowboard Max?
>>
>> There are two versions of the Minnow boards. One is Minnow board based
>> on Atom E6xx (the same Queensbay platform) and with my series it
>> should be pretty easy to get U-Boot up and running on that board. The
>> other version is a newer version called Minnow board Max which has an
>> Intel Atom E38xx SoC (BayTrail platform). Luckily Intel has released
>> FSP for BayTrail as well. So it should not take too much effort
>> supporting Minnow board Max with Intel FSP on top of my series.
>>
>> Minnow board: http://www.minnowboard.org/technical-features/
>> Minnow board Max: http://www.minnowboard.org/meet-minnowboard-max/
>
> OK thanks for the info. Is the original board obsolete? I do actually
> have the minnowboard-max so I will see if the FSP works on it. But
> I'll wait until your next patch version. I suspect we will want to
> move some things from queensbay to a common directory if I do that.

I am not sure if the original board is obsolete. These two boards are
based on two different Intel Atom platforms so I would not say the Max
board replaces the V1 board. Queensbay is a two chipset solution but
BayTrail is an SoC. Yep, I originally wanted to put fsp related codes
under arch/x86/lib however since it is now only validated on one
platform I decided not to put there. But I did download the BayTrail
FSP and compared the supported codes with the Queensbay FSP, they are
almost the same except the FSP VPD/UPD structures (those are platform
related stuff).

Regards,
Bin