[U-Boot] [PATCH] armv8/fsl-layerscape: add IFC fixup for LS1043A with QSPI enabled

[york sun]

On 07/19/2016 11:39 PM, Qianyu Gong wrote:
> Hi York,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: york sun
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 5:58 AM
>> To: Scott Wood <oss at buserror.net>; Qianyu Gong <qianyu.gong at nxp.com>; u-
>> boot at lists.denx.de
>> Cc: Mingkai Hu <mingkai.hu at nxp.com>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] armv8/fsl-layerscape: add IFC fixup for LS1043A with QSPI
>> enabled
>>
>> On 03/30/2016 07:39 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 06:20 +0000, Qianyu Gong wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>>
>>>> Because this muxing can't be changed at runtime.
>>>> Two ways so far to configure it:
>>>> 1. SW6[1-4] switches on ls1043aqds board.
>>>> 2. Modify QIXIS board config registers and reset the board.
>>>
>>> These sound like runtime to me -- not compile time.
>>>
>>
>> Qianyu,
>>
>> If one can change mux by either changing switches, or setting QIXIS registers, you
>> should be able to read those status and run the fixup, agree?
>>
>> York
>
> Yes, we could read QIXIS registers at runtime. But the current argument is that if we need to
> build two rcw&U-Boot images to support IFC or QSPI, which is already done on LS1021AQDS
> and LS1043AQDS. This is made at compile time and I just have no idea to solve the rcw issue.
> So.. how do you think about it?
>

Having different SPL builds is not ideal, but that's what we have. 
Without introducing another mechanism, we cannot concatenate SPL with 
different RCW files.

On the other side, if condition can be detected at run time, please do 
so, even when the condition only applies to one of SPL boot method. We 
should reduce compile option as much as we can so we have less options 
to test.

York