* [U-Boot] U-boot Porting @ 2012-07-05 11:42 sayed zahid 2012-07-05 13:18 ` Andreas Bießmann 2012-07-05 23:52 ` Aaron Williams 0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: sayed zahid @ 2012-07-05 11:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi , I have basic knowledge of porting u-boot to a new board. But now i have got a task to port u-boot on cavium mips based board. As i know that mips architecture is already supported, but will it support all cavium octeon mips variants? Please put some light on this. I would be glad if you guys, give my some idea to where to start with or suggest some documents which will help me understand and port on a new architecture Regards Zahid ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] U-boot Porting 2012-07-05 11:42 [U-Boot] U-boot Porting sayed zahid @ 2012-07-05 13:18 ` Andreas Bießmann 2012-07-05 23:05 ` Daniel Schwierzeck 2012-07-05 23:56 ` Aaron Williams 2012-07-05 23:52 ` Aaron Williams 1 sibling, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Andreas Bießmann @ 2012-07-05 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Dear sayed zahid, On 05.07.2012 13:42, sayed zahid wrote: > Hi , > I have basic knowledge of porting u-boot to a new board. But now i have got > a task to port u-boot on cavium mips based board. As i know that mips > architecture is already supported, but will it support all cavium octeon > mips variants? I guess no. I had to work with some non mainlined version of u-boot provided by cavium a year ago (or something around that). At that time we got a ---8<--- abiessmann@azuregos % git grep U_BOOT_VERSION include/version.h include/version.h:#define U_BOOT_VERSION "U-Boot 1.1.1" --->8--- :( AFAIR there was a lot of basic stuff missing in mainline U-Boot to get Cavium mips64 running at that time so I didn't start to port these proprietary changes (well it would not have been accepted the way it was written down; beside that cavium forced us to sign a NDA for that piece of GPL code). I have not followed their open source efforts since then, but I saw a lot of work on the linux-mips list by David Daney and I think Aaron Williams is working for Cavium too and is on this list. Maybe one of them can comment? > Please put some light on this. I would be glad if you guys, > give my some idea to where to start with or suggest some documents which > will help me understand and port on a new architecture You should not hesitate to contact their support and ask for proper mainline support of u-boot ;) Enough Cavium bashing. Regarding your question for documents, I'm sorry I can not help you here. I recommend start working with some mainlined device which is comparable, get firm with the architecture, try to find commonalities, get the new cpu in u-boot step by step. Best regards Andreas Bie?mann ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] U-boot Porting 2012-07-05 13:18 ` Andreas Bießmann @ 2012-07-05 23:05 ` Daniel Schwierzeck 2012-07-05 23:56 ` Aaron Williams 1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Daniel Schwierzeck @ 2012-07-05 23:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Sayed, 2012/7/5 Andreas Bie?mann <andreas.devel@googlemail.com>: > Dear sayed zahid, > > On 05.07.2012 13:42, sayed zahid wrote: >> Hi , >> I have basic knowledge of porting u-boot to a new board. But now i have got >> a task to port u-boot on cavium mips based board. As i know that mips >> architecture is already supported, but will it support all cavium octeon >> mips variants? > > I guess no. I had to work with some non mainlined version of u-boot > provided by cavium a year ago (or something around that). At that time > we got a > > ---8<--- > abiessmann at azuregos % git grep U_BOOT_VERSION include/version.h > include/version.h:#define U_BOOT_VERSION "U-Boot 1.1.1" > --->8--- > > :( > > AFAIR there was a lot of basic stuff missing in mainline U-Boot to get > Cavium mips64 running at that time so I didn't start to port these > proprietary changes (well it would not have been accepted the way it was > written down; beside that cavium forced us to sign a NDA for that piece > of GPL code). > > I have not followed their open source efforts since then, but I saw a > lot of work on the linux-mips list by David Daney and I think Aaron > Williams is working for Cavium too and is on this list. Maybe one of > them can comment? > >> Please put some light on this. I would be glad if you guys, >> give my some idea to where to start with or suggest some documents which >> will help me understand and port on a new architecture > > You should not hesitate to contact their support and ask for proper > mainline support of u-boot ;) > AFAIK Aaron Williams is actively working on that issue. You can find some infos in the mailing list archives: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/88757/focus=88759 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/94220/focus=94229 Best regards, Daniel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] U-boot Porting 2012-07-05 13:18 ` Andreas Bießmann 2012-07-05 23:05 ` Daniel Schwierzeck @ 2012-07-05 23:56 ` Aaron Williams 2012-07-06 8:09 ` Andreas Bießmann 1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Aaron Williams @ 2012-07-05 23:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Andreas, We have been shipping 2011.03 for some time and internally are planning to use 2012.07 when it is released since we are tracking the top of trunk. We have made a lot of improvements since then and added a lot of new capabilities. -Aaron On 07/05/2012 06:18 AM, Andreas Bie?mann wrote: > Dear sayed zahid, > > On 05.07.2012 13:42, sayed zahid wrote: >> Hi , >> I have basic knowledge of porting u-boot to a new board. But now i have got >> a task to port u-boot on cavium mips based board. As i know that mips >> architecture is already supported, but will it support all cavium octeon >> mips variants? > I guess no. I had to work with some non mainlined version of u-boot > provided by cavium a year ago (or something around that). At that time > we got a > > ---8<--- > abiessmann at azuregos % git grep U_BOOT_VERSION include/version.h > include/version.h:#define U_BOOT_VERSION "U-Boot 1.1.1" > --->8--- > > :( > > AFAIR there was a lot of basic stuff missing in mainline U-Boot to get > Cavium mips64 running at that time so I didn't start to port these > proprietary changes (well it would not have been accepted the way it was > written down; beside that cavium forced us to sign a NDA for that piece > of GPL code). > > I have not followed their open source efforts since then, but I saw a > lot of work on the linux-mips list by David Daney and I think Aaron > Williams is working for Cavium too and is on this list. Maybe one of > them can comment? > >> Please put some light on this. I would be glad if you guys, >> give my some idea to where to start with or suggest some documents which >> will help me understand and port on a new architecture > You should not hesitate to contact their support and ask for proper > mainline support of u-boot ;) > > Enough Cavium bashing. > > Regarding your question for documents, I'm sorry I can not help you > here. I recommend start working with some mainlined device which is > comparable, get firm with the architecture, try to find commonalities, > get the new cpu in u-boot step by step. > > Best regards > > Andreas Bie?mann > -- Aaron Williams Software Engineer Cavium, Inc. (408) 943-7198 (510) 789-8988 (cell) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] U-boot Porting 2012-07-05 23:56 ` Aaron Williams @ 2012-07-06 8:09 ` Andreas Bießmann 0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Andreas Bießmann @ 2012-07-06 8:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Aaron, On 06.07.2012 01:56, Aaron Williams wrote: > Hi Andreas, > > We have been shipping 2011.03 for some time and internally are planning > to use 2012.07 when it is released since we are tracking the top of > trunk. We have made a lot of improvements since then and added a lot of > new capabilities. great to hear. Looking forward to work with Cavium devices again to see whats happened ;) Best regards Andrea Bie?mann ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] U-boot Porting 2012-07-05 11:42 [U-Boot] U-boot Porting sayed zahid 2012-07-05 13:18 ` Andreas Bießmann @ 2012-07-05 23:52 ` Aaron Williams 2012-07-06 8:19 ` Andreas Bießmann 1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Aaron Williams @ 2012-07-05 23:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Zahid, I am in charge of U-Boot for OCTEON MIPS. I have not pushed the changes back upstream since the amount of code is enormous (over 430K lines of code!). Granted, a huge percentage of that is from generated register files but it is still a huge amount of code. Just the DRAM initialization code is 9600 lines of code for DDR2 and DDR3 support. We also do things that no other architecture does with U-Boot such as we always run in TLB mapped memory. The code is available under GPL but you need to contact support at cavium.com. With the TLB mapping it no longer matters where U-Boot is loaded in memory. The same U-Boot binary image can start executing at any 64K flash boundary in the first 4MB of flash (so we support the same image as a failsafe and standard bootloader), any 4MB boundary in RAM (when booted over PCI or eJTAG) and out of L2 cache (our top of trunk copies itself from flash to the L2 cache very early on to speed up memory initialization). The TLB mapping also allows U-Boot to be copied to the very top of memory since KSEG0 is rather limited to only 256MB. This is essential since we can support many GB of RAM which otherwise requires 64-bit addressing. I need to push some of my changes back upstream since I have added some drivers for some temperature sensors, power monitors, fixed the AHCI driver and added a few features over the standard U-Boot (such as dynamically generated prompt support). -Aaron On 07/05/2012 04:42 AM, sayed zahid wrote: > Hi , > I have basic knowledge of porting u-boot to a new board. But now i have got > a task to port u-boot on cavium mips based board. As i know that mips > architecture is already supported, but will it support all cavium octeon > mips variants? Please put some light on this. I would be glad if you guys, > give my some idea to where to start with or suggest some documents which > will help me understand and port on a new architecture > Regards > Zahid > > > > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot at lists.denx.de > http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot -- Aaron Williams Software Engineer Cavium, Inc. (408) 943-7198 (510) 789-8988 (cell) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] U-boot Porting 2012-07-05 23:52 ` Aaron Williams @ 2012-07-06 8:19 ` Andreas Bießmann 2012-07-06 20:37 ` Aaron Williams 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Andreas Bießmann @ 2012-07-06 8:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Dear Aaron Williams, On 06.07.2012 01:52, Aaron Williams wrote: > Hi Zahid, > > I am in charge of U-Boot for OCTEON MIPS. I have not pushed the changes > back upstream since the amount of code is enormous (over 430K lines of > code!). Granted, a huge percentage of that is from generated register > files but it is still a huge amount of code. Just the DRAM > initialization code is 9600 lines of code for DDR2 and DDR3 support. > > We also do things that no other architecture does with U-Boot such as we > always run in TLB mapped memory. The code is available under GPL but you > need to contact support at cavium.com. With the TLB mapping it no longer > matters where U-Boot is loaded in memory. The same U-Boot binary image > can start executing at any 64K flash boundary in the first 4MB of flash > (so we support the same image as a failsafe and standard bootloader), > any 4MB boundary in RAM (when booted over PCI or eJTAG) and out of L2 > cache (our top of trunk copies itself from flash to the L2 cache very > early on to speed up memory initialization). The TLB mapping also allows > U-Boot to be copied to the very top of memory since KSEG0 is rather > limited to only 256MB. This is essential since we can support many GB of > RAM which otherwise requires 64-bit addressing. > > I need to push some of my changes back upstream since I have added some > drivers for some temperature sensors, power monitors, fixed the AHCI > driver and added a few features over the standard U-Boot (such as > dynamically generated prompt support). I would really like to see the whole stuff in mainline in favor of out of tree patches maintained only inside Cavium. Mainline U-Boot may also benefit from your generic changes and you will get reviews for free. Best regards Andreas Bie?mann ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] U-boot Porting 2012-07-06 8:19 ` Andreas Bießmann @ 2012-07-06 20:37 ` Aaron Williams 2012-07-09 21:11 ` Daniel Schwierzeck 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Aaron Williams @ 2012-07-06 20:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Andreas, I would love to see OCTEON support in the mainline as well, though I am not sure how I should go about this since it is a substantial amount of code. Fortunately most of the changes are not to the common code, and many of the common code changes are feature enhancements portable to other platforms as well. One big problem I have is I have no way of testing any of my stuff on non-Cavium boards or CPUs so testing my changes and making sure I didn't break anything is rather difficult. I am also not too familiar with git or how to actually submit the patches with it though I can work with our Linux kernel developer on this. When I redid U-Boot using the up-to-date code I made a large effort to keep our stuff separate from the rest of the U-Boot code so much of our stuff is fairly well isolated. I placed most of our code under arch/mips/cpu/octeon and arch/mips/include/asm/arch-octeon (though some of the files in arch/mips/include/asm also had to be changed). Most of the rest of the code is in board/octeon/xxx though there's a fair amount in board/octeon/common. Most major changes to the common code were done by marking the common code functions as "weak" and replacing them elsewhere. A few of the files in U-Boot are also shared by some other utilities, such as our code for loading and executing simple executive applications and initializing DDR memory. One constantly moving target in U-Boot is the simple executive code. We support writing se applications which are basically ELF executables that run directly on the OCTEON processor without an operating system underneath. These can be run in parallel with other applications on different cores along with Linux. The main thing involved here is the memory management. We use a "named block" memory scheme which is used by the Linux kernel and simple executive applications to find and share various data structures such as the flat device tree (BE and LE versions), temporary load address, linux reserved address, PCI console memory block and some JTAG information. We need this because we can have multiple applications running on different cores. U-Boot itself always runs on core 0 but needs to be aware of the other CPU cores (currently up to 32). We have little in common with the other MIPS processors since we have to support 64-bit mode. To do this we compile it with our own toolchain using the N32 ABI. I believe most of our changes are now in the mainline GCC as well now. We also do not use arch/mips/lib/board.c since our version is so different. I will be the first to admit that the code needs to be cleaned up since board_init_f is huge. We have done some interesting things with our U-Boot image. Our U-Boot binary can be executed at any memory address as long as it's 4MB aligned (or 64K aligned when running from flash). We have a single binary image that can be booted directly from RAM (when booting over eJTAG or PCI/PCIe), out of L2 cache and out of flash. By doing this we can also store two copies of U-Boot in flash (the same binary image) to support a failsafe and normal bootloader. 2702: common board code 28,867: support for 33 different boards 13,568: configuration .h files for all of our boards 2,215: board_octeon.c (replacement for board.c) 24,004: .c files in arch/mips/cpu/octeon/ 10,147: .c files in arch/mips/cpu/octeon/commands/ 155,994: .c files from our simple executive which are linked to U-Boot. This includes files for various errata, networking support, clock, memory management used by our simple executive environment as well as code to deal with many of the modules in all of our various chips. 10,166: .c files for OCTEON-specific commands, some of which could be merged into the core code. 279,576: .h files for our simple executive. Some of these files are very large because they include generated header files for all of the register definitions for all of our chips (including different revisions). The most common change we have to make to any PCI drivers is to support the appropriate address mapping. In our case the virtual address needs to be translated to a PCI DMA address, which may be different than a physical address. Fortunately the mechanisms are available in the PCI driver to support this. The drivers also need to be extended to be able to pass 64-bit addresses to the devices. For devices not on the PCI bus (i.e. USB EHCI) we have to use a different mechanism in order to always pass the physical address. All accesses to registers have to go through wrappers (which are usually already in place) since all of our non-PCI device registers are always mapped into various 64-bit address spaces. Here's a list of changes from a quick glance: Added and changed drivers: - TI tmp42x temperature sensor - NX SAA56004X temperature sensor (I think I wrote one of the other temp sensor drivers as well) - Power driver for ispPAC chip - OCTEON MDIO driver - OCTEON USB driver for OCTEON I and OCTEON - USB clock init code for OCTEON II USB EHCI interface (slight modifications to EHCI driver for OCTEON II to handle virtual memory mapping and 64-bit addressing) - Intel E1000 driver - minor change to support 64-bit addressing and virtual to PCI DMA addressing. - OCTEON GPIO driver - OCTEON MMC/SD/SDHC/SDXC driver - OCTEON SPI driver - Fixed AHCI SATA driver so it compiles and works - Modified NAND driver in order to support large NAND chips, also added support for multi-bit ECC - Fixed CFI NOR flash driver to properly handle 8-bit mode. - Minor changes to PCI driver Drivers not under drivers/ but under arch/mips/cpu/octeon: - Watchdog - compact flash (this also requires a rather hacked up version of the cmd_ide.c file in order to support multiple CF devices properly) - ethernet (including management, SGMII, XAUI, SPI and some other interface types) - PCI driver - PCI console driver (for OCTEON NIC/PCI target boards) - serial - I2C - MIPS micro assembler (required for watchdog support) lib changes: - Made md5, sha1, sha256 and crc32 functions weak since we supply OCTEON replacement functions that take advantage of encryption/hash/CRC instructions to reduce code size - Updated lzma code to latest - Added bch.c for handling multi-bit ECC. - Enabled and/or added a few more string functions - Made a few other functions "weak" Common/other changes: - Minor changes to various commands so that if an address of 0 is supplied by the user it will use the default load address (typically 0x20000000 for us) - Some environment changes in order to support the environment being in RAM when the bootloader is started. - RAM environment support - Support for user-defined functions to be called whenever setenv is called to hook environment variable changes. - MTD and flash filesystem support for NAND > 4GiB to match Linux kernel. - Support for prompt to be created dynamically and also defined in an environment variable (including in hush shell) - Minor change to DHCP code to allow for custom options - Support for DHCP option to set TFTP server IP - Added commands for bunzip and unlzma - Minor change to mmc command to enable some additional functionality - Minor change to dlmalloc.c init code so to not zero out memory in our simulator case. - Minor changes to usb code to handle some buggy hardware (i.e. SanDisk Cruzer similar to Linux). - Support for go command, elf and some other commands to call a function so we can perform clean-up before handing execution off (i.e. shutting down networking support, freeing resources). Octeon specific commands: - bootloaderupdate - bootloadervalidate - bootoct (boots simple executive applications) - bootoctlinux (boots the OCTEON Linux kernel) - base64 - sets 64-bit base address for md64, etc. - cmp64/cp64/loop64/md64/mm64 (64-bit versions of cp/md/mm), also added .d for 64-bit accesses - tftp (alias for tftpboot since so many customers rely on tftp) - read64/read64b/read64l/read64s - read a 64-bit memory address (used to read registers) - write64/write64b/write64l/write64s - writes a 64-bit memory address (used to write registers) - octnand - OCTEON-specific NAND read/write routines used for writing bootloaders, etc. to NAND - qlm - print/modify our QLM interface JTAG settings (a QLM is an I/O interface that can be SGMII/XAUI/ILK/PCIe and various other high-speed interface types). - octreginfo - prints out all of the CP0 registers and TLB entries. - namedprint - prints out all named memory blocks - freeprint - prints out all free memory blocks - namedalloc - allocate a named memory block - octwd - configure OCTEON watchdog support - tlv_eeprom - display or modify the contents of a board-specific I2C EEPROM used by Cavium boards which contains board identification and configuration information. - eraseenv - erases the environment flash block - bootstage3 - searches for a stage 3 bootloader, used when booting from MMC/SD. - octbootbus - Prints all of the timing parameters on our boot bus or allows the timing parameters to be changed for various devices -Aaron On 07/06/2012 01:19 AM, Andreas Bie?mann wrote: > Dear Aaron Williams, > > On 06.07.2012 01:52, Aaron Williams wrote: >> Hi Zahid, >> >> I am in charge of U-Boot for OCTEON MIPS. I have not pushed the changes >> back upstream since the amount of code is enormous (over 430K lines of >> code!). Granted, a huge percentage of that is from generated register >> files but it is still a huge amount of code. Just the DRAM >> initialization code is 9600 lines of code for DDR2 and DDR3 support. >> >> We also do things that no other architecture does with U-Boot such as we >> always run in TLB mapped memory. The code is available under GPL but you >> need to contact support at cavium.com. With the TLB mapping it no longer >> matters where U-Boot is loaded in memory. The same U-Boot binary image >> can start executing at any 64K flash boundary in the first 4MB of flash >> (so we support the same image as a failsafe and standard bootloader), >> any 4MB boundary in RAM (when booted over PCI or eJTAG) and out of L2 >> cache (our top of trunk copies itself from flash to the L2 cache very >> early on to speed up memory initialization). The TLB mapping also allows >> U-Boot to be copied to the very top of memory since KSEG0 is rather >> limited to only 256MB. This is essential since we can support many GB of >> RAM which otherwise requires 64-bit addressing. >> >> I need to push some of my changes back upstream since I have added some >> drivers for some temperature sensors, power monitors, fixed the AHCI >> driver and added a few features over the standard U-Boot (such as >> dynamically generated prompt support). > I would really like to see the whole stuff in mainline in favor of out > of tree patches maintained only inside Cavium. > Mainline U-Boot may also benefit from your generic changes and you will > get reviews for free. > > Best regards > > Andreas Bie?mann > -- Aaron Williams Software Engineer Cavium, Inc. (408) 943-7198 (510) 789-8988 (cell) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] U-boot Porting 2012-07-06 20:37 ` Aaron Williams @ 2012-07-09 21:11 ` Daniel Schwierzeck 2012-07-10 22:39 ` Aaron Williams 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Daniel Schwierzeck @ 2012-07-09 21:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Aaron, 2012/7/6 Aaron Williams <Aaron.Williams@cavium.com>: > Hi Andreas, > > I would love to see OCTEON support in the mainline as well, though I am not > sure how I should go about this since it is a substantial amount of code. > Fortunately most of the changes are not to the common code, and many of the > common code changes are feature enhancements portable to other platforms as > well. we should do this step by step. My suggestions are: 1) send a patch series with only the changes on MIPS common code. I assume that you updated most of the header files with the current ones from linux? I am currently working on extending the support for MIPS32 CPUs thus we should unify the common MIPS code base at first. 2) send a patch series with only basic support for Octeon and provide a toolchain for free download. This allows us to do build tests. 3) send patches for all minimum required Octeon drivers and common code changes to make mainline U-Boot working on real hardware 4) send patches for additional drivers and features > > One big problem I have is I have no way of testing any of my stuff on > non-Cavium boards or CPUs so testing my changes and making sure I didn't > break anything is rather difficult. I think that is no big problem. I can test MIPS specific changes on MIPS32 machines and QEMU. Changes to common code are reviewed by and tested by the according maintainers. At least you have to do compile tests as described here: http://www.denx.de/wiki/view/U-Boot/Patches#Notes > I am also not too familiar with git or > how to actually submit the patches with it though I can work with our Linux > kernel developer on this. > > When I redid U-Boot using the up-to-date code I made a large effort to keep > our stuff separate from the rest of the U-Boot code so much of our stuff is > fairly well isolated. I placed most of our code under arch/mips/cpu/octeon > and arch/mips/include/asm/arch-octeon (though some of the files in > arch/mips/include/asm also had to be changed). Most of the rest of the code > is in board/octeon/xxx though there's a fair amount in board/octeon/common. Sounds good. Maybe you should use board/cavium/xxx instead because the directories in board/ reflect either the board name or the vendor name. <snip> > We have little in common with the other MIPS processors since we have to > support 64-bit mode. To do this we compile it with our own toolchain using > the N32 ABI. I believe most of our changes are now in the mainline GCC as > well now. > > We also do not use arch/mips/lib/board.c since our version is so different. > I will be the first to admit that the code needs to be cleaned up since > board_init_f is huge. actually that is not a problem. What about arch/mips/lib/bootm.c? Best regards, Daniel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] U-boot Porting 2012-07-09 21:11 ` Daniel Schwierzeck @ 2012-07-10 22:39 ` Aaron Williams 2012-07-11 5:50 ` Wolfgang Denk 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Aaron Williams @ 2012-07-10 22:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Daniel, My comments are inline. On 07/09/2012 02:11 PM, Daniel Schwierzeck wrote: > Hi Aaron, > > 2012/7/6 Aaron Williams <Aaron.Williams@cavium.com>: >> Hi Andreas, >> >> I would love to see OCTEON support in the mainline as well, though I am not >> sure how I should go about this since it is a substantial amount of code. >> Fortunately most of the changes are not to the common code, and many of the >> common code changes are feature enhancements portable to other platforms as >> well. > we should do this step by step. My suggestions are: > > 1) send a patch series with only the changes on MIPS common code. I > assume that you updated most of the header files > with the current ones from linux? I am currently working on extending > the support for MIPS32 CPUs thus we should unify the common > MIPS code base at first. I made a number of additions to the header files. For the most part I did not update them from Linux but modified the existing ones. I tried to keep my changes minimal. As I said I use board_octeon.c instead of board.c. I have wrapped all of our changes with #ifdef CONFIG_OCTEON. It should be fairly easy to do this. > > 2) send a patch series with only basic support for Octeon and provide > a toolchain for free download. This allows us to do build tests. GCC as of version 4.7 should work. Note that for OCTEON we compile using the N32 ABI instead of O32. Doing "basic" OCTEON support will not be easy since there is a huge dependence on our SDK. > > 3) send patches for all minimum required Octeon drivers and common > code changes to make mainline U-Boot working on real hardware The only required drivers are the MDIO drivers. Most of the other drivers, i.e. Ethernet, PCI, I2C, serial, flash, NAND and watchdog are located under arch/mips/cpu/octeon. I don't know if it makes sense to move these into the drivers tree since these are specific to OCTEON and some (i.e. the Ethernet driver and NAND) have a strong dependency on our SDK. > > 4) send patches for additional drivers and features >> One big problem I have is I have no way of testing any of my stuff on >> non-Cavium boards or CPUs so testing my changes and making sure I didn't >> break anything is rather difficult. > I think that is no big problem. I can test MIPS specific changes on > MIPS32 machines and QEMU. > Changes to common code are reviewed by and tested by the according maintainers. > At least you have to do compile tests as described here: > http://www.denx.de/wiki/view/U-Boot/Patches#Notes I'll try this. I have been enforcing the U-Boot coding standard and recently we switched our SDK to follow that (though our SDK does not honor the 80 column limit). >> I am also not too familiar with git or >> how to actually submit the patches with it though I can work with our Linux >> kernel developer on this. >> >> When I redid U-Boot using the up-to-date code I made a large effort to keep >> our stuff separate from the rest of the U-Boot code so much of our stuff is >> fairly well isolated. I placed most of our code under arch/mips/cpu/octeon >> and arch/mips/include/asm/arch-octeon (though some of the files in >> arch/mips/include/asm also had to be changed). Most of the rest of the code >> is in board/octeon/xxx though there's a fair amount in board/octeon/common. > Sounds good. Maybe you should use board/cavium/xxx instead because the > directories in board/ > reflect either the board name or the vendor name. We do that. We use board/octeon/xxx for everything right now including all of our vendors since the boards all have dependencies on board/octeon/common. Because we had a problem with vendors just modifying an existing board and complaining when we did a new release I created a script to assist in adding a new board which uses this directory. I would rather use octeon instead of cavium since we also have several ARM based chips with more to follow. > <snip> > >> We have little in common with the other MIPS processors since we have to >> support 64-bit mode. To do this we compile it with our own toolchain using >> the N32 ABI. I believe most of our changes are now in the mainline GCC as >> well now. >> >> We also do not use arch/mips/lib/board.c since our version is so different. >> I will be the first to admit that the code needs to be cleaned up since >> board_init_f is huge. > actually that is not a problem. What about arch/mips/lib/bootm.c? > > Best regards, > Daniel > The only change I made to bootm.c is that for OCTEON we don't have uncached memory. On the OCTEON processor, all DRAM is cached (and the L1 data and L2 caches are coherent). I know that some of the code will need to be cleaned up. Our board_octeon.c has grown into a big mess that could use some serious clean-up. We also have added some tools for U-Boot. One tool generates a special header for U-Boot which contains a CRC and other information. Unfortunately I will not have a lot of time in the near future since I need to do some work on Valgrind. I can try and create a patch for the header files and bootm.c, though. -Aaron -- Aaron Williams Software Engineer Cavium, Inc. (408) 943-7198 (510) 789-8988 (cell) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] U-boot Porting 2012-07-10 22:39 ` Aaron Williams @ 2012-07-11 5:50 ` Wolfgang Denk 0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Wolfgang Denk @ 2012-07-11 5:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Dear Aaron, In message <4FFCAF12.1030401@cavium.com> you wrote: > > I made a number of additions to the header files. For the most part I > did not update them from Linux but modified the existing ones. I tried > to keep my changes minimal. As I said I use board_octeon.c instead of > board.c. I have wrapped all of our changes with #ifdef CONFIG_OCTEON. > > It should be fairly easy to do this. We spend a lot of time here discussiong thaings that you have done and how easy it will be to merge these into mainline. I think we are wasting time here. Instead of much further ado, you should just start posting the first small sets of these easy to merge patches, so we can really see if they go in that easily. > GCC as of version 4.7 should work. Note that for OCTEON we compile using > the N32 ABI instead of O32. Doing "basic" OCTEON support will not be > easy since there is a huge dependence on our SDK. Obviouslye we need a way to test the code so we can be sure it is at least compile-clean. So the availability of a tool chain is somethign that needs to be solved first. > The only required drivers are the MDIO drivers. Most of the other > drivers, i.e. Ethernet, PCI, I2C, serial, flash, NAND and watchdog are > located under arch/mips/cpu/octeon. I don't know if it makes sense to > move these into the drivers tree since these are specific to OCTEON and > some (i.e. the Ethernet driver and NAND) have a strong dependency on our > SDK. See recent discussion about location of drivers. > I'll try this. I have been enforcing the U-Boot coding standard and > recently we switched our SDK to follow that (though our SDK does not > honor the 80 column limit). I hav eno idea what your SDK is or does, but the code you submit should stick to the established rules. > We do that. We use board/octeon/xxx for everything right now including > all of our vendors since the boards all have dependencies on > board/octeon/common. Because we had a problem with vendors just Are there any other vendors manufacturing or selling Octeon chips? The directory structure in U-Boot is board/<vendor_name>/... , not board<chip_family_name>/ , so this shoud be changed into board/cavium/ > modifying an existing board and complaining when we did a new release I > created a script to assist in adding a new board which uses this > directory. I would rather use octeon instead of cavium since we also > have several ARM based chips with more to follow. You can always set up something as board/cavium/octeon_common/ board/cavium/octeon_board_foo/ board/cavium/octeon_board_bar/ board/cavium/arm_common/ board/cavium/arm_board_foo/ board/cavium/arm_board_bar/ etc. But the vendor part pf the directory path should match the vendor name, and not be something different. > We also have added some tools for U-Boot. One tool generates a special > header for U-Boot which contains a CRC and other information. Integrate this into mkimage ? > Unfortunately I will not have a lot of time in the near future since I > need to do some work on Valgrind. I can try and create a patch for the > header files and bootm.c, though. Hm... given yourprevious explanations, I expect that some significant efforts will be needed (on all sides) to get this stuff mainlined. I recommend you make sure someone at Cavium has sufficient resources to handle this, otherwise it's likely to be a frustrating experience on both sides. Best regards, Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-07-11 5:50 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2012-07-05 11:42 [U-Boot] U-boot Porting sayed zahid 2012-07-05 13:18 ` Andreas Bießmann 2012-07-05 23:05 ` Daniel Schwierzeck 2012-07-05 23:56 ` Aaron Williams 2012-07-06 8:09 ` Andreas Bießmann 2012-07-05 23:52 ` Aaron Williams 2012-07-06 8:19 ` Andreas Bießmann 2012-07-06 20:37 ` Aaron Williams 2012-07-09 21:11 ` Daniel Schwierzeck 2012-07-10 22:39 ` Aaron Williams 2012-07-11 5:50 ` Wolfgang Denk
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.