[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: socfpga: fix SPL booting from fpga OnChip RAM

[Simon Goldschmidt]

On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 1:42 PM Marek Vasut <marex at denx.de> wrote:
>
> On 10/08/2018 06:04 AM, Simon Goldschmidt wrote:
> >
> >
> > Marek Vasut <marex at denx.de <mailto:marex at denx.de>> schrieb am Mo., 8.
> > Okt. 2018, 02:20:
> >
> >     On 10/07/2018 01:08 PM, Simon Goldschmidt wrote:
> >     > On 06.10.2018 22:38, Tom Rini wrote:
> >     >> On Sat, Oct 06, 2018 at 10:33:42PM +0200, Simon Goldschmidt wrote:
> >     >>
> >     >>> This patch prevents disabling the FPGA bridges when
> >     >>> SPL or U-Boot is executed from FPGA onchip RAM.
> >     >>>
> >     >>> Signed-off-by: Simon Goldschmidt
> >     <simon.k.r.goldschmidt at gmail.com
> >     <mailto:simon.k.r.goldschmidt at gmail.com>>
> >     >>> ---
> >     >>>
> >     >>>
> >     >>> There are other patches required to make boot from
> >     >>> FPGA work correctly:
> >     >>> - CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE needs to be set to 0xC0000000
> >     >>>    ideally this is done by moving SPL_TEXT_BASE to Kconfig:
> >     >>>    https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/976918/
> >     >>> - spl_ram.c needs this patch by Michal Simek:
> >     >>>    https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/978694/
> >     >>> - For U-Boot to be run from FPGA onchip RAM, either
> >     >>>    CONFIG_SYS_EXTRA_ENV_RELOC needs to be used or this patch
> >     >>>    is required to relocate gd->env_addr:
> >     >>>    https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/975702/
> >     >> For the record, I'm currently reviewing the last two parts here.  The
> >     >> first one will come soon (I do Kconfig migrations separate so I
> >     can see
> >     >> a lack of size change).
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > OK, after Tom merged the last to parts, I can confirm I can
> >     successfully
> >     > boot from FPGA by adapting CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE via config and hacking
> >     > CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE to 0xC0000000 (as moving this to Kconfig is still
> >     > missing).
> >
> >     So is this patch still needed ?
> >
> >
> > Yes, sorry for being unclear there.
>
> Can we do what this patch does with less ifdeffery ? Maybe with simple
> if (address > FOO && < bar) remap() ?

Hmm, I can try, but the change in misc_gen5.c depends on whether we build SPL or
U-Boot, I'm not sure how to do that without ifdef...

Does 'if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(SPL_BUILD))' work? Does it look nice? It's not
used anywhere else like that.

Simon