[U-Boot] [RFC PACH v2 1/1] Add vexpress_aemv8a_aarch32 variant
Tom Rini
trini at konsulko.com
Mon Dec 5 18:13:04 CET 2016
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 04:11:45PM +0000, Ryan Harkin wrote:
> The ARM AEMv8 FVP model can be run in Aarch64 or Aarch32 mode. Aarch32
> support is enable per-CPU when launching the model, eg:
>
> -C cluster0.cpu0.CONFIG64=0
>
> This patch adds a new defconfig and some variant specific selections in
> vexpress_armv8a.h.
>
> This patch is co-authored with Soby Mathew <Soby.Mathew at arm.com>.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ryan Harkin <ryan.harkin at linaro.org>
[snip]
> ---
>
> Changes since v1:
> This single patch replaces my earlier RFC series of two patches, where
> the first modified generic code and the other added a new variant.
>
> After Tom's suggestion that I review the Raspberry PI code, my original
> [RFC PATCH 1/2] has been dropped completely.
>
> To address the generic problems from the first patch:
> - move CONFIG_REMAKE_ELF to CONFIG_ARM64 only builds in vexpress_aemv8a.h
> - define CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT for non-ARM64 builds (ie. for CPU_V7)
> - the ARMv8 MMU code in vexpress64.h becomes conditiononal on CONFIG_ARM64
>
> I'm not sure if the last change is the correct approach, but it works. I
> suspect that at the very least, a rework of the vexpress code would split
> this MMU code into an ARM64 specific .c file.
Assuming your plan is to follow this up with a series to unify and
correct board/armltd/vexpress* then yes, I think this is a logical step
forward. And some level of these CONFIG options should be moved to
Kconfig as part of that unification.
[snip]
> +config TARGET_VEXPRESS_AEMV8_AARCH32
> + bool "Support Versatile Express ARMv8a 32-bit FVP BASE model booting from DRAM"
> + select CPU_V7
> + help
> + This target is derived from TARGET_VEXPRESS64_BASE_FVP and over-rides
> + the default config to allow the user to load the images directly into
> + DRAM using model parameters rather than by using semi-hosting to load
> + the files from the host filesystem.
> +
> config TARGET_VEXPRESS64_BASE_FVP_DRAM
> bool "Support Versatile Express ARMv8a FVP BASE model booting from DRAM"
I know neither are "nice" names but why not
TARGET_VEXPRESS64_AEMV8_AARCH32_FVP_DRAM ? Or is this just something
else that I shouldn't worry about until we're unifying the various
options here?
--
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20161205/f79c136e/attachment.sig>
More information about the U-Boot
mailing list