[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] bcm2836 SoC support (used in Raspberry Pi 2 model B)

[Stephen Warren]

On 02/10/2015 01:14 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Hi Tom,
>
> On Mon,  9 Feb 2015 23:56:45 -0700
> Stephen Warren <swarren at wwwdotorg.org> wrote:
>
>> The bcm2835 and bcm2836 are essentially identical, except:
>> - The CPU is an ARM1176 v.s. a quad-core Cortex-A7.
>> - The physical address of many IO controllers has moved.
>>
>> Rather than introducing a whole new bcm2836 value for $(SOC) or $(ARCH),
>> update the existing bcm2835 code to handle the minor differences, and
>> plumb it into the ARMv7 CPU architecture.
>>
> [ snip ]
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/bcm2835/Makefile b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/bcm2835/Makefile
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..ed1ee4753d49
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/bcm2835/Makefile
>> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
>> +#
>> +# (C) Copyright 2012 Stephen Warren
>> +#
>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier:	GPL-2.0+
>> +#
>> +
>> +src_dir := ../../arm1176/bcm2835/
>> +
>> +obj-y	:=
>> +obj-y	+= $(src_dir)/init.o
>> +obj-y	+= $(src_dir)/reset.o
>> +obj-y	+= $(src_dir)/timer.o
>> +obj-y	+= $(src_dir)/mbox.o
>
>
> Tom,
>
> Here is another proof that the arch/$(ARCH)/cpu/$(CPU)/$(SOC) structure is wrong.
> BCM2836 crib most of the source files from BCM2835
> but they must be placed separetely because of the difference of the main processor.
>
> Could you tell me your impression about my RFC series?
> (Anyway, it is already out-dated.  I can rebase if you like.)

FWIW, I did wonder about basing my patches on top of your directory 
re-org. However, since it was (IIRC) an RFC, I shied away from that for now.

> Of course, we can merge  arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/bcm2835 and arch/arm/cpu/armv7/bcm2836
> into arch/arm/mach-bcm lator.

mach-bcm2835 or mach-bcm283x would likely be better than mach-bcm, since 
there are various other lines of Broadcom SoCs (some already supported 
in U-Boot), and I have no particular reason to believe they share design 
with the bcm2835/6.