[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 22/22] x86: Add support for Intel Minnowboard Max

Andrew Bradford andrew at bradfordembedded.com
Thu May 28 20:09:09 CEST 2015


On 05/28 10:30, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> On 27 May 2015 at 08:39, Andrew Bradford <andrew at bradfordembedded.com> wrote:
> > On 05/27 13:19, Bin Meng wrote:
> >> Hi Simon,
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 5:37 AM, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> >> > Hi Andrew,
> >> >
> >> > On 26 May 2015 at 13:52, Andrew Bradford <andrew at bradfordembedded.com> wrote:
> >> >> Hi Simon and Bin (sorry for bringing this back from the dead),
> >> >>
> >> >> But I have a question about fsp_configs.c down below:
> >> >>
> >> >> On 01/27 22:13, Simon Glass wrote:
> >> >> ------------->8---------------
> >> >>> diff --git a/arch/x86/cpu/baytrail/fsp_configs.c b/arch/x86/cpu/baytrail/fsp_configs.c
> >> >>> new file mode 100644
> >> >>> index 0000000..86b6926
> >> >>> --- /dev/null
> >> >>> +++ b/arch/x86/cpu/baytrail/fsp_configs.c
> >> >>> @@ -0,0 +1,156 @@
> >> >>> +/*
> >> >>> + * Copyright (C) 2013, Intel Corporation
> >> >>> + * Copyright (C) 2014, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com>
> >> >>> + *
> >> >>> + * SPDX-License-Identifier:  Intel
> >> >>> + */
> >> >>> +
> >> >>> +#include <common.h>
> >> >>> +#include <asm/arch/fsp/azalia.h>
> >> >>> +#include <asm/fsp/fsp_support.h>
> >> >>> +
> >> >>> +/* ALC262 Verb Table - 10EC0262 */
> >> >>> +static const uint32_t verb_table_data13[] = {
> >> >>> +     /* Pin Complex (NID 0x11) */
> >> >>> +     0x01171cf0,
> >> >>> +     0x01171d11,
> >> >>> +     0x01171e11,
> >> >>> +     0x01171f41,
> >> >>> +     /* Pin Complex (NID 0x12) */
> >> >>> +     0x01271cf0,
> >> >>> +     0x01271d11,
> >> >>> +     0x01271e11,
> >> >>> +     0x01271f41,
> >> >>> +     /* Pin Complex (NID 0x14) */
> >> >>> +     0x01471c10,
> >> >>> +     0x01471d40,
> >> >>> +     0x01471e01,
> >> >>> +     0x01471f01,
> >> >>> +     /* Pin Complex (NID 0x15) */
> >> >>> +     0x01571cf0,
> >> >>> +     0x01571d11,
> >> >>> +     0x01571e11,
> >> >>> +     0x01571f41,
> >> >>> +     /* Pin Complex (NID 0x16) */
> >> >>> +     0x01671cf0,
> >> >>> +     0x01671d11,
> >> >>> +     0x01671e11,
> >> >>> +     0x01671f41,
> >> >>> +     /* Pin Complex (NID 0x18) */
> >> >>> +     0x01871c20,
> >> >>> +     0x01871d98,
> >> >>> +     0x01871ea1,
> >> >>> +     0x01871f01,
> >> >>> +     /* Pin Complex (NID 0x19) */
> >> >>> +     0x01971c21,
> >> >>> +     0x01971d98,
> >> >>> +     0x01971ea1,
> >> >>> +     0x01971f02,
> >> >>> +     /* Pin Complex (NID 0x1A) */
> >> >>> +     0x01a71c2f,
> >> >>> +     0x01a71d30,
> >> >>> +     0x01a71e81,
> >> >>> +     0x01a71f01,
> >> >>> +     /* Pin Complex */
> >> >>> +     0x01b71c1f,
> >> >>> +     0x01b71d40,
> >> >>> +     0x01b71e21,
> >> >>> +     0x01b71f02,
> >> >>> +     /* Pin Complex */
> >> >>> +     0x01c71cf0,
> >> >>> +     0x01c71d11,
> >> >>> +     0x01c71e11,
> >> >>> +     0x01c71f41,
> >> >>> +     /* Pin Complex */
> >> >>> +     0x01d71c01,
> >> >>> +     0x01d71dc6,
> >> >>> +     0x01d71e14,
> >> >>> +     0x01d71f40,
> >> >>> +     /* Pin Complex */
> >> >>> +     0x01e71cf0,
> >> >>> +     0x01e71d11,
> >> >>> +     0x01e71e11,
> >> >>> +     0x01e71f41,
> >> >>> +     /* Pin Complex */
> >> >>> +     0x01f71cf0,
> >> >>> +     0x01f71d11,
> >> >>> +     0x01f71e11,
> >> >>> +     0x01f71f41,
> >> >>> +};
> >> >>> +
> >> >>> +/*
> >> >>> + * This needs to be in ROM since if we put it in CAR, FSP init loses it when
> >> >>> + * it drops CAR.
> >> >>> + *
> >> >>> + * TODO(sjg at chromium.org): Move to device tree when FSP allows it
> >> >>> + *
> >> >>> + * VerbTable: (RealTek ALC262)
> >> >>> + * Revision ID = 0xFF, support all steps
> >> >>> + * Codec Verb Table For AZALIA
> >> >>> + * Codec Address: CAd value (0/1/2)
> >> >>> + * Codec Vendor: 0x10EC0262
> >> >>> + */
> >> >>> +static const struct pch_azalia_verb_table azalia_verb_table[] = {
> >> >>> +     {
> >> >>> +             {
> >> >>> +                     0x10ec0262,
> >> >>> +                     0x0000,
> >> >>> +                     0xff,
> >> >>> +                     0x01,
> >> >>> +                     0x000b,
> >> >>> +                     0x0002,
> >> >>> +             },
> >> >>> +             verb_table_data13
> >> >>> +     }
> >> >>> +};
> >> >>> +
> >> >>> +const struct pch_azalia_config azalia_config = {
> >> >>> +     .pme_enable = 1,
> >> >>> +     .docking_supported = 1,
> >> >>> +     .docking_attached = 0,
> >> >>> +     .hdmi_codec_enable = 1,
> >> >>> +     .azalia_v_ci_enable = 1,
> >> >>> +     .rsvdbits = 0,
> >> >>> +     .azalia_verb_table_num = 1,
> >> >>> +     .azalia_verb_table = azalia_verb_table,
> >> >>> +     .reset_wait_timer_us = 300
> >> >>> +};
> >> >>> +
> >> >>> +void update_fsp_upd(struct upd_region *fsp_upd)
> >> >>> +{
> >> >>> +     struct memory_down_data *mem;
> >> >>> +
> >> >>> +     /*
> >> >>> +      * Configure everything here to avoid the poor hard-pressed user
> >> >>> +      * needing to run Intel's binary configuration tool. It may also allow
> >> >>> +      * us to support the 1GB single core variant easily.
> >> >>> +      *
> >> >>> +      * TODO(sjg at chromium.org): Move to device tree
> >> >>> +      */
> >> >>> +     fsp_upd->mrc_init_tseg_size = 8;
> >> >>> +     fsp_upd->mrc_init_mmio_size = 0x800;
> >> >>> +     fsp_upd->emmc_boot_mode = 0xff;
> >> >>> +     fsp_upd->enable_sdio = 1;
> >> >>> +     fsp_upd->enable_sdcard = 1;
> >> >>> +     fsp_upd->enable_hsuart0 = 1;
> >> >>> +     fsp_upd->azalia_config_ptr = (uint32_t)&azalia_config;
> >> >>> +     fsp_upd->enable_i2_c0 = 0;
> >> >>> +     fsp_upd->enable_i2_c2 = 0;
> >> >>> +     fsp_upd->enable_i2_c3 = 0;
> >> >>> +     fsp_upd->enable_i2_c4 = 0;
> >> >>> +     fsp_upd->enable_xhci = 0;
> >> >>> +     fsp_upd->igd_render_standby = 1;
> >> >>> +
> >> >>> +     mem = &fsp_upd->memory_params;
> >> >>> +     mem->enable_memory_down = 1;
> >> >>> +     mem->dram_speed = 1;
> >> >>> +     mem->dimm_width = 1;
> >> >>> +     mem->dimm_density = 2;
> >> >>> +     mem->dimm_tcl = 0xb;
> >> >>> +     mem->dimm_trpt_rcd = 0xb;
> >> >>> +     mem->dimm_twr = 0xc;
> >> >>> +     mem->dimm_twtr = 6;
> >> >>> +     mem->dimm_trrd = 6;
> >> >>> +     mem->dimm_trtp = 6;
> >> >>> +     mem->dimm_tfaw = 0x14;
> >> >>> +}
> >> >>
> >> >> I am trying to move this fsp upd to use device tree as I am trying to
> >> >> create a patch set to add the Intel Valley Island E38xx board (which
> >> >> uses a SODIMM rather than memory down).  In doing so, I've found that
> >> >> global data doesn't seem to be available when update_fsp_upd() is called
> >> >> and generally it seems that gd->fdt_blob is used to get a reference to
> >> >> the flattened device tree.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm not super familiar with device tree, but I was attempting to use
> >> >> fdtdec_next_compatible(gd->fdt_blob, 0, COMPAT_INTEL_BAYTRAIL_FSP) in a
> >> >> similar way that Quark does in my patchset (I've properly created the
> >> >> COMPAT_INTEL_BAYTRAIL_FSP define and some device tree nodes in my dts
> >> >> file).  When I call fdtdec_next_compatible() the board does something
> >> >> which I'm unable to debug (Valley Island does not have the early UART
> >> >> pins connected so I have no early UART capability) but things just seem
> >> >> to stop.
> >> >>
> >> >> In manually tracing the calls which lead to update_fsp_upd(), it seems
> >> >> that we haven't yet set up global data, so it makes sense that I can't
> >> >> reference it.  But the device tree should be available in NOR flash or
> >> >> in some other way which we can access in order to get the FSP UPD
> >> >> settings.
> >> >>
> >> >> Is there a simple way to access the device tree while it's still in NOR
> >> >> flash so I can avoid using gd?  Or can global data be setup prior to
> >> >> calling update_fsp_upd() (I believe we're still in CAR at this point)?
> >> >> Or am I misunderstanding something basic here?
> >> >>
> >> >> Did you have a rough outline of how this could be moved to device tree?
> >> >
> >> > This is a bit tricky. I would like to move fsp_init() later in the
> >> > init sequence (e.g. to board_init_f()). See this TODO in the code:
> >> >
> >> > /*
> >> > * TODO:
> >> > *
> >> > * According to FSP architecture spec, the fsp_init() will not return
> >> > * to its caller, instead it requires the bootloader to provide a
> >> > * so-called continuation function to pass into the FSP as a parameter
> >> > * of fsp_init, and fsp_init() will call that continuation function
> >> > * directly.
> >> > *
> >> > * The call to fsp_init() may need to be moved out of the car_init()
> >> > * to cpu_init_f() with the help of some inline assembly codes.
> >> > * Note there is another issue that fsp_init() will setup another stack
> >> > * using the fsp_init parameter stack_top after DRAM is initialized,
> >> > * which means any data on the previous stack (on the CAR) gets lost
> >> > * (ie: U-Boot global_data). FSP is supposed to support such scenario,
> >> > * however it does not work. This should be revisited in the future.
> >> > */
> >> >
> >> > The primary issues are:
> >> > 1. The need to recover the global_data
> >> > 2. The need to change to a new stack
> >> >
> >> > Re 1, my reading of the HOB stuff is that it is supposed to provide
> >> > you with a pointer to the CAR RAM (all ~128KB of it) so that you can
> >> > go back and find your old stack (and in our case, global_data).
> >> >
> >> > Bin mentioned that this doesn't work - his is the comment above after
> >> > I asked him about it.
> >> >
> >> > But if it could be made to work, then we could delay the init.
> >> >
> >> > Re 2, U-Boot expects to change to a new stack when it wants to, which
> >> > is at the boundary of board_init_f() and board_init_r(). The Intel FSP
> >> > should not mandate a stack change over a C function call. IMO that is
> >> > just bad design. Dealing with it is not very easy, but one option is
> >> > to run with the new stack for the rest of the board_init_f() sequence
> >> > and then change stack again at the end of the sequence. Ick.
> >> >
> >> > To specifically address your problem, global_data is not available
> >> > until board_init_f() is called, and the device tree comes into
> >> > existence soon after. We could hack around it - e.g. with microcode we
> >> > find it in the device tree and stick a pointer to it in a special
> >> > place. But the real solution is to figure out how to move this
> >> > fsp_init() stuff to later in the sequence. For non-FSP boards we don't
> >> > have this problem - e.g. ivybridge does RAM init long after we have
> >> > global_data and device tree. Note it is still running from flash at
> >> > this point, but CAR is set up and that is where global_data resides.
> >> >
> >> > I'm interested to hear what you figure out.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I just noticed that Intel has released FSP specification v1.1 [1] in
> >> April. After a rough read of the 1.1 spec, it looks to me that Intel
> >> changed the fsp_init() design by breaking it down into 3 sub-routines:
> >> FspMemoryInit(), TempRamExit() and FspSiliconInit(). I feel this might
> >> be more logical to adapt U-Boot, but again I am not sure if the stack
> >> migration stuff is still there. So far I don't see any new FSP
> >> releases using the 1.1 spec.
> >>
> >> [1] https://www-ssl.intel.com/content/www/us/en/embedded/software/fsp/fsp-architecture-spec-v1-1.html
> >
> > There's also a very good overview of how to use an FSP v1.1 firmware at
> > [1].  It states that the problem in v1.0 for bootloaders was that when
> > you call FspInit() that temporary ram was torn down unconditionally.
> > Now, in v1.1, it says after calling FspMemoryInit() that control will be
> > given back to the bootloader running in the temporary ram (CAR?).  Then
> > the bootloader is responsible for migrating to main memory and to call
> > TempRamExit() so that temporary memory can be cleaned up.
> >
> > This sounds like what u-boot would want and what Simon described above,
> > for u-boot to be in charge of relocating from CAR to main memory, right?
> > If so, likely things will be much easier once there's a v1.1 FSP for
> > baytrail...
> >
> 
> Indeed, care to ping them to find out when this might happen?

I'm not sure, but I think Intel may have the source on Github [1].  I'm
starting to look through the code to see if it's actually useful for
E3800 parts or not, but a quick scan through the git log does show
changes to support FSP v1.1 and it appears to be actively developed...

[1]:https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-IntelFspPkg

Having a few other, more experienced, eyes on this to see if it's useful
would probably be good.

I will see what else I can find out about an FSP v1.1 release for E3800
parts, in the mean time.

Thanks!
-Andrew


More information about the U-Boot mailing list