[PATCH v2 05/21] arm: socfpga: Override 'lowlevel_init' to support ATF

[Marek Vasut]

On 2/20/20 3:27 AM, Ang, Chee Hong wrote:
>> On 2/19/20 1:25 PM, chee.hong.ang at intel.com wrote:
>> [...]
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-socfpga/lowlevel_init.S
>>> b/arch/arm/mach-socfpga/lowlevel_init.S
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..68053a0
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-socfpga/lowlevel_init.S
>>
>> This should be some lowlevel_init_64.S to make it clear it's only for
>> arm64 platforms.
> OK. It makes sense. Thanks.
>>
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
>>> +/*
>>> + * Copyright (C) 2019, Intel Corporation  */
>>> +
>>> +#include <asm-offsets.h>
>>> +#include <config.h>
>>> +#include <linux/linkage.h>
>>> +#include <asm/macro.h>
>>> +
>>> +ENTRY(lowlevel_init)
>>> +	mov	x29, lr			/* Save LR */
>>> +
>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_GICV2) || defined(CONFIG_GICV3) #ifdef
>>> +CONFIG_SPL_ATF
>>> +	branch_if_slave x0, 2f
>>> +#else
>>> +	branch_if_slave x0, 1f
>>> +#endif
>>> +
>>> +	ldr	x0, =GICD_BASE
>>> +	bl	gic_init_secure
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD
>>> +	b	2f
>>> +#else
>>> +	b	3f
>>> +#endif
>>
>> Can't this be done in C code ? Can we reduce the ifdeffery ?
> This lowlevel_init function is shared by SPL and U-Boot and they
> run in slightly different flow.

What does this 'different flow' mean ?

> I don't think this can be done in C code but let me see what I can
> do to further optimize the flow to reduce the ifdeffery.

That would be nice, thanks.