Pull request: u-boot-sunxi/master for 2021.10 - 2nd part

[Tom Rini]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 10:20:32PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
> 在 2021-10-29星期五的 11:53 +0100，Andre Przywara写道：
> > On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 14:29:10 -0400
> > Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Tom,
> > 
> > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 03:06:58PM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Hi Tom,
> > > > 
> > > > please pull the second sunxi PR for the 2021.10 merge window.
> > > > I decided to merge most of Samuel's rework and some smaller
> > > > patches that
> > > > pave the way for more DM transitions and for accommodating the
> > > > RISC-V SoC
> > > > in the future. Merging them now gives us the opportunity to get
> > > > some wider
> > > > testing, since those subtle changes tend to break things.
> > > > 
> > > > Compile-tested for all 159 sunxi boards, boot-tested on Pine64-
> > > > LTS
> > > > and OrangePi Zero.
> > > > 
> > > > Summary:
> > > > - Add and enable watchdog driver
> > > > - Prepare for SYSRESET driven AXP poweroff
> > > > - Prepare for SoCs without MMC2
> > > > - Some fixes for extending SPL (SPL-DM for RISC-V)
> > > > - Some preparations for proper VBUS management
> > > > - Fix secure monitor move
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Andre
> > > > 
> > > > ================================================
> > > > The following changes since commit
> > > > 355d1e24f6143c4839be3c015c191421c4e9449c:
> > > > 
> > > >   Merge
> > > > https://source.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-spi (2021-10-23
> > > > 10:49:28 -0400)
> > > > 
> > > > are available in the Git repository at:
> > > > 
> > > >  
> > > > https://source.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-sunxi.git master
> > > > 
> > > > for you to fetch changes up to
> > > > c846fe43f0561311eb7261b34023a04646cdbd0d:
> > > > 
> > > >   mmc: sunxi: conditionally include MMC2 initialization code
> > > > (2021-10-25 14:54:57 +0100)
> > > >   
> > > 
> > > So first, up, this is now applied to u-boot/master.
> > 
> > Many thanks, and sorry for the late push!
> > 
> > > Next, I dug out my original Kickstarted Pine A64 board (as it's the
> > > only
> > > sunxi platform I have), and I see it's detected with 1GB memory and
> > > as
> > > Pine64+ which seems wrong, with the pine64_plus_defconfig (which is
> > > what
> > > I thought handled all of the A64 platforms).
> > 
> > For the naming: There are three SKUs for the original Pine A64 board:
> > - Pine A64: 512 MB with 100Mbit Ethernet PHY, lacking display and
> > camera
> >   connectors (rare, mostly to meet the original 15 USD price tag)
> > - Pine A64+ 1GB: 1GB DRAM with 1Gbit Ethernet PHY, with all
> > connectors
> > - Pine A64+ 2GB: 2GB DRAM with 1Gbit Ethernet PHY, with all
> > connectors
> 
> You can check whether your board is non-Plus or Plus 1G by the model of
> the Ethernet PHY (non-Plus has RTL8201) or not soldered FPC connectors.
> They do share a PCB design. Plus 2G is a dedicated PCB design as it
> needs to use 4x 512MB DRAM chips.

OK, mine has an RTL8211E and is 1G for sure now that I look harder at
it.

On a related note, this board will draw power via the UART, is there any
easy HW change I can do, to fix that?  It's otherwise a lot harder to
put this in to my CI lab.

> > Also note that for those first boards from Pine64 the name of the
> > company (Pine64) is sometimes uses for the boards as well ("Pine64
> > board"), even though this should be "Pine A64 board from Pine64".
> > That
> > is somewhat reflected in the defconfig name. In hindsight the
> > defconfig
> > should have been named more "pine-a64_defconfig", but I guess this is
> > too late now? I see a lot of inconsistencies in naming, especially
> > regarding capitalisation and dashes vs. underscores, check
> > configs/[bB]anana* for instance, but probably renaming causes more
> > harm
> > than good?
> > 
> > So I guess you have the middle one (the most common among the first
> > wave), so that all seems correct? We differentiate between the non-
> > plus
> > and plus version at runtime, by the amount of DRAM detected, so
> > that's
> > pretty reliable. The 1GB and 2GB are otherwise the same, so same DT.
> > The actual non-plus versions are somewhat rare, I guess most people
> > just added the 4(!) bucks to get more RAM and Gigabit Ethernet.
> > 
> > > I've not booted this up in
> > > forever, and Armbian (the first binary I grabbed) does this as well
> > > with
> > > v2020.10 (and I'm using the same TF-A rev of 87311b4) so maybe the
> > > answer is I should just e-waste this board and pick up something
> > > else?
> > 
> > Not sure exactly why? Is there anything that's broken, apart from the
> > presumed misnaming? I would be happy to hear about any issues you
> > have,
> > in my experience those "outsider" inputs are very useful (I am far
> > too
> > familiar with all those tiny quirks).
> > When U-Boot starts, UEFI boot should work out of the box, just pop a
> > generic arm64 Debian/SuSE/Fedora/Ubuntu EFI installer USB stick in,
> > should work even with HDMI and USB keyboard.

Ah, so Armbian is a fails to boot (I can't even interrupt autoboot).
Given that I was previously sure I had the 512MB model (but, I was
wrong) I thought maybe this is just garbage now.  But! Now that I'm
pretty sure this is being seen right, I'm going to grab a different
distribution and see what happens.

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 659 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20211029/a20c2d4c/attachment.sig>