[U-Boot] [PATCH v3 1/4] mips: add base support for atheros ath79 based SOCs

[Marek Vasut]

On Sunday, December 27, 2015 at 12:37:16 PM, Wills Wang wrote:
> On 12/27/2015 07:04 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On Sunday, December 27, 2015 at 11:18:25 AM, Wills Wang wrote:
> >> On 12/27/2015 06:09 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, December 27, 2015 at 09:07:36 AM, Wills Wang wrote:
> >>>> On 12/27/2015 03:38 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>>>> On Sunday, December 27, 2015 at 08:33:26 AM, Wills Wang wrote:
> >>>>>> On 12/27/2015 02:37 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Saturday, December 26, 2015 at 07:29:51 PM, Wills Wang wrote:
> >>>>>>>> WASP is ar9341.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> Please do not top post.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> Did you try if the memory is accessible on your platform ? AR9331 I
> >>>>>>> have here has the SRAM at 0xbd007000 , just like that machine in
> >>>>>>> [1] .
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> I found there is a memory segment at 0xbd000000...0xbd007fff. it's
> >>>>>> independent of DDR physical memory, can be read and wrote, but
> >>>>>> hardware can't boot up if don't execute lowlevel_init.S when define
> >>>>>> CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR=0xbd007000 to set C stack into SRAM.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Stack grows down, so of course if you put stack at the beginning of
> >>>>> SRAM, that cannot work ;-) Put it at the end , 0xbd008000.
> >>>> 
> >>>> This memory segment was mapped circularly at 0xbd000000...0xbdffffff.
> >>> 
> >>> So is this area at 0xbd008000 usable for stack or not ?
> >> 
> >> Same times board can boot up, but in a very unstable. i use the
> >> following setting:
> >> 
> >> #define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_RAM_ADDR    0xbd000000
> > 
> > Should be 0xbd007000
> > 
> >> #define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_RAM_SIZE    (32 * SZ_1K)
> > 
> > Should be 4 KiB large.
> > 
> >> #define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_OFFSET \
> >> 
> >>       (CONFIG_SYS_INIT_RAM_SIZE - GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE)
> >> 
> >> #define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR \
> >> 
> >>       (CONFIG_SYS_INIT_RAM_ADDR + CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_OFFSET)
> > 
> > Did you investigate why the board has problems ?
> 
> "lowlevel_init.S" can't be dropped.

Thank you very much for all the effort you put into investigating and explaining 
why this SRAM area cannot be used ... not. From my side, consider this patch to 
be NAKed.

Best regards,
Marek Vasut