[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 3/4] arm: imx: m53evk: remove usage of mx53_dram_size

[Marek Vasut]

On 12/19/2017 08:48 AM, Patrick Brünn wrote:
>> From: Patrick Brünn
>> Sent: Dienstag, 19. Dezember 2017 05:29
>>> From: Marek Vasut [mailto:marex at denx.de]
>>> Sent: Montag, 18. Dezember 2017 13:30
>>> On 12/18/2017 01:16 PM, Patrick Brünn wrote:
>>>>> From: Marek Vasut [mailto:marex at denx.de]
>>>>> Sent: Montag, 18. Dezember 2017 12:52
>>>>> On 12/18/2017 12:40 PM, Patrick Brünn wrote:
>> [...]
>>>>> btw do you use SPL ? If not, you should ...
>>>> I will read more about SPL. Until now, I thought I will only benefit,
>>>> if my initial boot media is limited in size. As we boot from sdcard,
>>>> that wasn't a problem to store 360k u-boot.
>>>
>>> The other is that you can ie. skip the whole u-boot altogether and boot
>>> linux directly.
>>>
>> Okay, I will try that.
>>> I wonder if it would be better to keep the static variable and avoid
>>> calling the get_ram_size() twice, it can save some CPU cycles. Besides
>>> that, thanks for the explanation/discussion !1
>>>
>> The pleasure was all mine. I will test SPL on my board and in case that's
>> working I think it still makes sense to move our common code into one file. Is
>> arch/arm/mach-imx/mx53_dram.c the best location for it?
>> At first I tried board/freescale/common/ but in that case I needed to use ugly
>> relative pathes in the Makefiles "../../"
> I spend a few hours this morning to experiment with SPL. From what I saw it
> would require some additional patches to enable SPL_MMC for imx53 and
> a few more changes to our sdcard layout (FAT vs. EXT4). Seeing all these
> additional #ifdefs to consider I just don't have a good feeling to port that adhoc
> for our board.
> Directly booting Linux still sounds tempting, but for the moment I cannot spend
> more effort into SPL for mx53cx9020. I will put that on my todo list. But for now
> I would like to concentrate to get mainline boot on mx53cx9020, again.
> 
> I would suggest:
> 1. I keep m53evk.c untouched for now.
> 2a. Either patch both mx53cx9020 and mx53loco to avoid static mx53_dram_size,
>    and have the shared code in arch/arm/mach-imx/mx53_dram.c
> 2b. Or patch only board/beckhoff/mx53cx9020/mx53cx9020.c
> 
> Fabio, what do you prefer?
Just patch the m53evk , use the static variable and all should be good IMO.

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut