From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Albert ARIBAUD <albert.u.boot@aribaud.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 13:53:26 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] RFC: am35xx: Rearrange SPL on am35xx
In-Reply-To: <1418927172-24834-1-git-send-email-sjg@chromium.org>
References: <1418927172-24834-1-git-send-email-sjg@chromium.org>
Message-ID: <20141219135326.1586cecd@lilith>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Hello Simon,

On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 11:26:12 -0700, Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
wrote:
> This is an attempt to tidy up the early SPL code in an attempt to pave
> the way for driver model in SPL:
> 
> - Avoid setting up SDRAM before board_init_f()
> - Avoid touching global_data before board_init_f()

By 'touching', do you mean writing or just reading?

> - Allow board_init_f() to set up a new stack (seems that the SRAM stack
> is not large enough on these boards)

I would prefer board_init_f() not to set up or change the stack.
Can't we keep board_init_f() minimal (i.e., just doing what's needed to
get DRAM working) with a minimal stack, then let crt0.S switch stacks,
and put whatever requires a larg(er) stack in board_init_r?

IOW, what prevents the general boot flow (and stack management) which
crt0.S applies to U-Boot from applying to SPL too?

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.