* [PATCH 0/3] add support for the asus C201 chromebook (4GiB) @ 2018-05-06 14:25 ` Marty E. Plummer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 14:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot; +Cc: vagrant, linux-rockchip, Marty E. Plummer Build and boot tested on my chromebook, which was generously altered by Simon Glass to have a servo header and also generously provided a servo board itself to do debugging with. It ''works'', but has a few oddities. I can't seem to get it to see my external sdcard or a usb flash drive, so I've been having to ymodem my kernel, fdt, and initramfs over to test booting (which does work). The screen is a bit inconsistent on whether or not it activates any given power cycle, but when it does work, it works right. The changes to sdram_common.c were taken from coreboot, as it has otherwise identical code (minus the if (!size_mb) block), and actually works on my hardware. Marty E. Plummer (3): sf: Add GigaDevice gd25q32b entry rockchip: add support for veyron-speedy (ASUS Chromebook C201) rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size arch/arm/dts/Makefile | 1 + arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts | 189 ++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c | 3 +- arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig | 11 ++ arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++--- board/google/veyron/Kconfig | 16 ++ configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig | 96 +++++++++++ drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c | 1 + 8 files changed, 353 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) create mode 100644 arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts create mode 100644 configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig -- 2.17.0 _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/3] add support for the asus C201 chromebook (4GiB) @ 2018-05-06 14:25 ` Marty E. Plummer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 14:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Build and boot tested on my chromebook, which was generously altered by Simon Glass to have a servo header and also generously provided a servo board itself to do debugging with. It ''works'', but has a few oddities. I can't seem to get it to see my external sdcard or a usb flash drive, so I've been having to ymodem my kernel, fdt, and initramfs over to test booting (which does work). The screen is a bit inconsistent on whether or not it activates any given power cycle, but when it does work, it works right. The changes to sdram_common.c were taken from coreboot, as it has otherwise identical code (minus the if (!size_mb) block), and actually works on my hardware. Marty E. Plummer (3): sf: Add GigaDevice gd25q32b entry rockchip: add support for veyron-speedy (ASUS Chromebook C201) rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size arch/arm/dts/Makefile | 1 + arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts | 189 ++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c | 3 +- arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig | 11 ++ arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++--- board/google/veyron/Kconfig | 16 ++ configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig | 96 +++++++++++ drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c | 1 + 8 files changed, 353 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) create mode 100644 arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts create mode 100644 configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig -- 2.17.0 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20180506142513.19911-1-hanetzer-zVALfsKDk1AS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org>]
* [PATCH 1/3] sf: Add GigaDevice gd25q32b entry 2018-05-06 14:25 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 14:25 ` Marty E. Plummer -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 14:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot-0aAXYlwwYIKGBzrmiIFOJg Cc: vagrant-8fiUuRrzOP0dnm+yROfE0A, linux-rockchip-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r, Marty E. Plummer Add entry for GigaDevice gd25q32b part. Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer-zVALfsKDk1AS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org> --- drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c b/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c index ef55abb01d..de940645ed 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c @@ -63,6 +63,7 @@ const struct spi_flash_info spi_flash_ids[] = { {"en25s64", INFO(0x1c3817, 0x0, 64 * 1024, 128, 0) }, #endif #ifdef CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_GIGADEVICE /* GIGADEVICE */ + {"gd25q32b", INFO(0xc84016, 0x0, 64 * 1024, 64, SECT_4K) }, {"gd25q64b", INFO(0xc84017, 0x0, 64 * 1024, 128, SECT_4K) }, {"gd25lq32", INFO(0xc86016, 0x0, 64 * 1024, 64, SECT_4K) }, #endif -- 2.17.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] sf: Add GigaDevice gd25q32b entry @ 2018-05-06 14:25 ` Marty E. Plummer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 14:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Add entry for GigaDevice gd25q32b part. Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> --- drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c b/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c index ef55abb01d..de940645ed 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c @@ -63,6 +63,7 @@ const struct spi_flash_info spi_flash_ids[] = { {"en25s64", INFO(0x1c3817, 0x0, 64 * 1024, 128, 0) }, #endif #ifdef CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_GIGADEVICE /* GIGADEVICE */ + {"gd25q32b", INFO(0xc84016, 0x0, 64 * 1024, 64, SECT_4K) }, {"gd25q64b", INFO(0xc84017, 0x0, 64 * 1024, 128, SECT_4K) }, {"gd25lq32", INFO(0xc86016, 0x0, 64 * 1024, 64, SECT_4K) }, #endif -- 2.17.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [U-Boot,1/3] sf: Add GigaDevice gd25q32b entry 2018-05-06 14:25 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-09 8:57 ` Philipp Tomsich -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-09 8:57 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: vagrant, u-boot, Marty E. Plummer, linux-rockchip > Add entry for GigaDevice gd25q32b part. > > Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > --- > drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > Reviewed-by: Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com> _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [U-Boot,1/3] sf: Add GigaDevice gd25q32b entry @ 2018-05-09 8:57 ` Philipp Tomsich 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-09 8:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot > Add entry for GigaDevice gd25q32b part. > > Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > --- > drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > Reviewed-by: Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/3] rockchip: add support for veyron-speedy (ASUS Chromebook C201) 2018-05-06 14:25 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 14:25 ` Marty E. Plummer -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 14:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot-0aAXYlwwYIKGBzrmiIFOJg Cc: vagrant-8fiUuRrzOP0dnm+yROfE0A, linux-rockchip-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r, Marty E. Plummer This adds support for the ASUS C201, a RK3288-based clamshell device. The device tree comes from linus's linux tree at 87ef12027b9b1dd0e0b12cf311fbcb19f9d92539. The SDRAM parameters are for 4GB Samsung LPDDR3, decoded from coreboot's src/mainboard/google/veyron/sdram_inf/sdram-lpddr3-samsung-4GB.inc Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer-zVALfsKDk1AS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org> --- arch/arm/dts/Makefile | 1 + arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts | 189 ++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c | 3 +- arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig | 11 ++ board/google/veyron/Kconfig | 16 ++ configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig | 96 +++++++++++ 6 files changed, 315 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts create mode 100644 configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile index ac7667b1e8..ee04d9bedd 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile +++ b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += \ rk3288-veyron-jerry.dtb \ rk3288-veyron-mickey.dtb \ rk3288-veyron-minnie.dtb \ + rk3288-veyron-speedy.dtb \ rk3288-vyasa.dtb \ rk3328-evb.dtb \ rk3368-lion.dtb \ diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..d5383cef0d --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts @@ -0,0 +1,189 @@ +/* + * Google Veyron Speedy Rev 1+ board device tree source + * + * Copyright 2015 Google, Inc + * + * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + */ + +/dts-v1/; +#include "rk3288-veyron-chromebook.dtsi" +#include "cros-ec-sbs.dtsi" + +/ { + model = "Google Speedy"; + compatible = "google,veyron-speedy-rev9", "google,veyron-speedy-rev8", + "google,veyron-speedy-rev7", "google,veyron-speedy-rev6", + "google,veyron-speedy-rev5", "google,veyron-speedy-rev4", + "google,veyron-speedy-rev3", "google,veyron-speedy-rev2", + "google,veyron-speedy", "google,veyron", "rockchip,rk3288"; + + chosen { + stdout-path = &uart2; + }; + + panel_regulator: panel-regulator { + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; + enable-active-high; + gpio = <&gpio7 RK_PB6 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&lcd_enable_h>; + regulator-name = "panel_regulator"; + startup-delay-us = <100000>; + vin-supply = <&vcc33_sys>; + }; + + vcc18_lcd: vcc18-lcd { + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; + enable-active-high; + gpio = <&gpio2 RK_PB5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&avdd_1v8_disp_en>; + regulator-name = "vcc18_lcd"; + regulator-always-on; + regulator-boot-on; + vin-supply = <&vcc18_wl>; + }; + + backlight_regulator: backlight-regulator { + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; + enable-active-high; + gpio = <&gpio2 RK_PB4 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&bl_pwr_en>; + regulator-name = "backlight_regulator"; + vin-supply = <&vcc33_sys>; + startup-delay-us = <15000>; + }; +}; + +&dmc { + rockchip,pctl-timing = <0x215 0xc8 0x0 0x35 0x26 0x2 0x70 0x2000d + 0x6 0x0 0x8 0x4 0x17 0x24 0xd 0x6 + 0x4 0x8 0x4 0x76 0x4 0x0 0x30 0x0 + 0x1 0x2 0x2 0x4 0x0 0x0 0xc0 0x4 + 0x8 0x1f4>; + rockchip,phy-timing = <0x48d7dd93 0x187008d8 0x121076 + 0x0 0xc3 0x6 0x1>; + rockchip,sdram-params = <0x20D266A4 0x5B6 6 533000000 6 13 0>; +}; + +&gpio_keys { + power { + gpios = <&gpio0 RK_PA5 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; + }; +}; + +&backlight { + power-supply = <&backlight_regulator>; +}; + +&panel { + power-supply = <&panel_regulator>; +}; + +&rk808 { + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&pmic_int_l>; +}; + +&sdmmc { + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&sdmmc_clk &sdmmc_cmd &sdmmc_cd_disabled &sdmmc_cd_gpio + &sdmmc_bus4>; + disable-wp; +}; + +&vcc_5v { + enable-active-high; + gpio = <&gpio7 RK_PC5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&drv_5v>; +}; + +&vcc50_hdmi { + enable-active-high; + gpio = <&gpio5 RK_PC3 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&vcc50_hdmi_en>; +}; + +&edp { + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&edp_hpd>; +}; + +&pinctrl { + backlight { + bl_pwr_en: bl_pwr_en { + rockchip,pins = <2 12 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; + }; + }; + + buck-5v { + drv_5v: drv-5v { + rockchip,pins = <7 21 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; + }; + }; + + edp { + edp_hpd: edp_hpd { + rockchip,pins = <7 11 RK_FUNC_2 &pcfg_pull_down>; + }; + }; + + emmc { + /* Make sure eMMC is not in reset */ + emmc_deassert_reset: emmc-deassert-reset { + rockchip,pins = <2 9 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; + }; + }; + + hdmi { + vcc50_hdmi_en: vcc50-hdmi-en { + rockchip,pins = <5 19 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; + }; + }; + + lcd { + lcd_enable_h: lcd-en { + rockchip,pins = <7 14 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; + }; + + avdd_1v8_disp_en: avdd-1v8-disp-en { + rockchip,pins = <2 13 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; + }; + }; + + pmic { + dvs_1: dvs-1 { + rockchip,pins = <7 12 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_down>; + }; + + dvs_2: dvs-2 { + rockchip,pins = <7 15 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_down>; + }; + }; +}; + +&i2c4 { + status = "okay"; + + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&i2c4_xfer>; + + trackpad@15 { + compatible = "elan,i2c_touchpad"; + interrupt-parent = <&gpio7>; + interrupts = <3 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING>; + /* + * Remove the inherited pinctrl settings to avoid clashing + * with bus-wide ones. + */ + /delete-property/pinctrl-names; + /delete-property/pinctrl-0; + reg = <0x15>; + vcc-supply = <&vcc33_io>; + wakeup-source; + }; +}; diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c index f3ea624277..9ae4802647 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c @@ -72,7 +72,8 @@ u32 spl_boot_device(void) fallback: #elif defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_JERRY) || \ defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBIT_MICKEY) || \ - defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE) + defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE) || \ + defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY) return BOOT_DEVICE_SPI; #endif return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1; diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig index 6beb26fd7a..8d1d37895d 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig @@ -30,6 +30,17 @@ config TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE functions. It includes 2 or 4GB of SDRAM and 16 or 32GB of internal MMC. The product name is ASUS Chromebook Flip. +config TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY + bool "Google/Rockchip Veyron-Speedy Chromebook" + select BOARD_LATE_INIT + help + Speedy is a RK3288-based clamshell device with 2 USB 2.0 ports, + micro HDMI, an 11.6 inch display, micro-SD card, + HD camera, touchpad, wifi and Bluetooth. It includes a Chrome OS + EC (Cortex-M3) to provide access to the keyboard and battery + functions. It includes 2 or 4GB of SDRAM and 16GB of internal MMC. + The product name is Asus Chromebook C201PA. + config TARGET_EVB_RK3288 bool "Evb-RK3288" select BOARD_LATE_INIT diff --git a/board/google/veyron/Kconfig b/board/google/veyron/Kconfig index 770e9aad28..7f55d78dac 100644 --- a/board/google/veyron/Kconfig +++ b/board/google/veyron/Kconfig @@ -45,3 +45,19 @@ config BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS # dummy def_bool y endif + +if TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY + +config SYS_BOARD + default "veyron" + +config SYS_VENDOR + default "google" + +config SYS_CONFIG_NAME + default "veyron" + +config BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS # dummy + def_bool y + +endif diff --git a/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig b/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..8789b56f37 --- /dev/null +++ b/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig @@ -0,0 +1,96 @@ +CONFIG_ARM=y +CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP=y +CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE=0x00100000 +CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_F_LEN=0x2000 +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288=y +# CONFIG_SPL_MMC_SUPPORT is not set +CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY=y +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_FLASH_SUPPORT=y +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_SUPPORT=y +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R_ADDR=0x80000 +CONFIG_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE="rk3288-veyron-speedy" +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART=y +# CONFIG_ANDROID_BOOT_IMAGE is not set +CONFIG_SILENT_CONSOLE=y +# CONFIG_DISPLAY_CPUINFO is not set +CONFIG_DISPLAY_BOARDINFO_LATE=y +CONFIG_BOARD_EARLY_INIT_F=y +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R=y +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R_MALLOC_SIMPLE_LEN=0x2000 +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD=y +CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH=y +CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH_MMC_DEV=0 +CONFIG_CMD_GPIO=y +CONFIG_CMD_GPT=y +CONFIG_CMD_I2C=y +CONFIG_CMD_MMC=y +CONFIG_CMD_SF=y +CONFIG_CMD_SF_TEST=y +CONFIG_CMD_SPI=y +CONFIG_CMD_USB=y +# CONFIG_CMD_SETEXPR is not set +CONFIG_CMD_CACHE=y +CONFIG_CMD_TIME=y +CONFIG_CMD_PMIC=y +CONFIG_CMD_REGULATOR=y +# CONFIG_SPL_DOS_PARTITION is not set +# CONFIG_SPL_EFI_PARTITION is not set +CONFIG_SPL_PARTITION_UUIDS=y +CONFIG_SPL_OF_CONTROL=y +CONFIG_OF_SPL_REMOVE_PROPS="pinctrl-0 pinctrl-names clock-names interrupt-parent assigned-clocks assigned-clock-rates assigned-clock-parents" +CONFIG_SPL_OF_PLATDATA=y +CONFIG_REGMAP=y +CONFIG_SPL_REGMAP=y +CONFIG_SYSCON=y +CONFIG_SPL_SYSCON=y +# CONFIG_SPL_SIMPLE_BUS is not set +CONFIG_CLK=y +CONFIG_SPL_CLK=y +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_GPIO=y +CONFIG_I2C_CROS_EC_TUNNEL=y +CONFIG_SYS_I2C_ROCKCHIP=y +CONFIG_I2C_MUX=y +CONFIG_DM_KEYBOARD=y +CONFIG_CROS_EC_KEYB=y +CONFIG_CROS_EC=y +CONFIG_CROS_EC_SPI=y +CONFIG_PWRSEQ=y +CONFIG_MMC_DW=y +CONFIG_MMC_DW_ROCKCHIP=y +CONFIG_PINCTRL=y +CONFIG_SPL_PINCTRL=y +# CONFIG_SPL_PINCTRL_FULL is not set +CONFIG_PINCTRL_ROCKCHIP_RK3288=y +CONFIG_DM_PMIC=y +# CONFIG_SPL_PMIC_CHILDREN is not set +CONFIG_PMIC_RK8XX=y +CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_FIXED=y +CONFIG_REGULATOR_RK8XX=y +CONFIG_PWM_ROCKCHIP=y +CONFIG_RAM=y +CONFIG_SPL_RAM=y +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_BASE=0xff690000 +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_CLOCK=24000000 +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_SHIFT=2 +CONFIG_SYS_NS16550=y +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SERIAL=y +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SPI=y +CONFIG_SYSRESET=y +CONFIG_USB=y +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_USB2_PHY=y +CONFIG_USB_STORAGE=y +CONFIG_USB_GADGET=y +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_MANUFACTURER="Rockchip" +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_VENDOR_NUM=0x2207 +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_PRODUCT_NUM=0x320a +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_DWC2_OTG=y +CONFIG_USB_FUNCTION_MASS_STORAGE=y +CONFIG_DM_VIDEO=y +CONFIG_DISPLAY=y +CONFIG_VIDEO_ROCKCHIP=y +CONFIG_DISPLAY_ROCKCHIP_EDP=y +CONFIG_DISPLAY_ROCKCHIP_HDMI=y +CONFIG_USE_TINY_PRINTF=y +CONFIG_CMD_DHRYSTONE=y +CONFIG_ERRNO_STR=y +# CONFIG_SPL_OF_LIBFDT is not set -- 2.17.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] rockchip: add support for veyron-speedy (ASUS Chromebook C201) @ 2018-05-06 14:25 ` Marty E. Plummer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 14:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot This adds support for the ASUS C201, a RK3288-based clamshell device. The device tree comes from linus's linux tree at 87ef12027b9b1dd0e0b12cf311fbcb19f9d92539. The SDRAM parameters are for 4GB Samsung LPDDR3, decoded from coreboot's src/mainboard/google/veyron/sdram_inf/sdram-lpddr3-samsung-4GB.inc Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> --- arch/arm/dts/Makefile | 1 + arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts | 189 ++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c | 3 +- arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig | 11 ++ board/google/veyron/Kconfig | 16 ++ configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig | 96 +++++++++++ 6 files changed, 315 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts create mode 100644 configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile index ac7667b1e8..ee04d9bedd 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile +++ b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += \ rk3288-veyron-jerry.dtb \ rk3288-veyron-mickey.dtb \ rk3288-veyron-minnie.dtb \ + rk3288-veyron-speedy.dtb \ rk3288-vyasa.dtb \ rk3328-evb.dtb \ rk3368-lion.dtb \ diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..d5383cef0d --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts @@ -0,0 +1,189 @@ +/* + * Google Veyron Speedy Rev 1+ board device tree source + * + * Copyright 2015 Google, Inc + * + * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + */ + +/dts-v1/; +#include "rk3288-veyron-chromebook.dtsi" +#include "cros-ec-sbs.dtsi" + +/ { + model = "Google Speedy"; + compatible = "google,veyron-speedy-rev9", "google,veyron-speedy-rev8", + "google,veyron-speedy-rev7", "google,veyron-speedy-rev6", + "google,veyron-speedy-rev5", "google,veyron-speedy-rev4", + "google,veyron-speedy-rev3", "google,veyron-speedy-rev2", + "google,veyron-speedy", "google,veyron", "rockchip,rk3288"; + + chosen { + stdout-path = &uart2; + }; + + panel_regulator: panel-regulator { + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; + enable-active-high; + gpio = <&gpio7 RK_PB6 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&lcd_enable_h>; + regulator-name = "panel_regulator"; + startup-delay-us = <100000>; + vin-supply = <&vcc33_sys>; + }; + + vcc18_lcd: vcc18-lcd { + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; + enable-active-high; + gpio = <&gpio2 RK_PB5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&avdd_1v8_disp_en>; + regulator-name = "vcc18_lcd"; + regulator-always-on; + regulator-boot-on; + vin-supply = <&vcc18_wl>; + }; + + backlight_regulator: backlight-regulator { + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; + enable-active-high; + gpio = <&gpio2 RK_PB4 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&bl_pwr_en>; + regulator-name = "backlight_regulator"; + vin-supply = <&vcc33_sys>; + startup-delay-us = <15000>; + }; +}; + +&dmc { + rockchip,pctl-timing = <0x215 0xc8 0x0 0x35 0x26 0x2 0x70 0x2000d + 0x6 0x0 0x8 0x4 0x17 0x24 0xd 0x6 + 0x4 0x8 0x4 0x76 0x4 0x0 0x30 0x0 + 0x1 0x2 0x2 0x4 0x0 0x0 0xc0 0x4 + 0x8 0x1f4>; + rockchip,phy-timing = <0x48d7dd93 0x187008d8 0x121076 + 0x0 0xc3 0x6 0x1>; + rockchip,sdram-params = <0x20D266A4 0x5B6 6 533000000 6 13 0>; +}; + +&gpio_keys { + power { + gpios = <&gpio0 RK_PA5 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; + }; +}; + +&backlight { + power-supply = <&backlight_regulator>; +}; + +&panel { + power-supply = <&panel_regulator>; +}; + +&rk808 { + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&pmic_int_l>; +}; + +&sdmmc { + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&sdmmc_clk &sdmmc_cmd &sdmmc_cd_disabled &sdmmc_cd_gpio + &sdmmc_bus4>; + disable-wp; +}; + +&vcc_5v { + enable-active-high; + gpio = <&gpio7 RK_PC5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&drv_5v>; +}; + +&vcc50_hdmi { + enable-active-high; + gpio = <&gpio5 RK_PC3 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&vcc50_hdmi_en>; +}; + +&edp { + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&edp_hpd>; +}; + +&pinctrl { + backlight { + bl_pwr_en: bl_pwr_en { + rockchip,pins = <2 12 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; + }; + }; + + buck-5v { + drv_5v: drv-5v { + rockchip,pins = <7 21 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; + }; + }; + + edp { + edp_hpd: edp_hpd { + rockchip,pins = <7 11 RK_FUNC_2 &pcfg_pull_down>; + }; + }; + + emmc { + /* Make sure eMMC is not in reset */ + emmc_deassert_reset: emmc-deassert-reset { + rockchip,pins = <2 9 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; + }; + }; + + hdmi { + vcc50_hdmi_en: vcc50-hdmi-en { + rockchip,pins = <5 19 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; + }; + }; + + lcd { + lcd_enable_h: lcd-en { + rockchip,pins = <7 14 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; + }; + + avdd_1v8_disp_en: avdd-1v8-disp-en { + rockchip,pins = <2 13 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; + }; + }; + + pmic { + dvs_1: dvs-1 { + rockchip,pins = <7 12 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_down>; + }; + + dvs_2: dvs-2 { + rockchip,pins = <7 15 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_down>; + }; + }; +}; + +&i2c4 { + status = "okay"; + + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&i2c4_xfer>; + + trackpad at 15 { + compatible = "elan,i2c_touchpad"; + interrupt-parent = <&gpio7>; + interrupts = <3 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING>; + /* + * Remove the inherited pinctrl settings to avoid clashing + * with bus-wide ones. + */ + /delete-property/pinctrl-names; + /delete-property/pinctrl-0; + reg = <0x15>; + vcc-supply = <&vcc33_io>; + wakeup-source; + }; +}; diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c index f3ea624277..9ae4802647 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c @@ -72,7 +72,8 @@ u32 spl_boot_device(void) fallback: #elif defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_JERRY) || \ defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBIT_MICKEY) || \ - defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE) + defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE) || \ + defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY) return BOOT_DEVICE_SPI; #endif return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1; diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig index 6beb26fd7a..8d1d37895d 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig @@ -30,6 +30,17 @@ config TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE functions. It includes 2 or 4GB of SDRAM and 16 or 32GB of internal MMC. The product name is ASUS Chromebook Flip. +config TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY + bool "Google/Rockchip Veyron-Speedy Chromebook" + select BOARD_LATE_INIT + help + Speedy is a RK3288-based clamshell device with 2 USB 2.0 ports, + micro HDMI, an 11.6 inch display, micro-SD card, + HD camera, touchpad, wifi and Bluetooth. It includes a Chrome OS + EC (Cortex-M3) to provide access to the keyboard and battery + functions. It includes 2 or 4GB of SDRAM and 16GB of internal MMC. + The product name is Asus Chromebook C201PA. + config TARGET_EVB_RK3288 bool "Evb-RK3288" select BOARD_LATE_INIT diff --git a/board/google/veyron/Kconfig b/board/google/veyron/Kconfig index 770e9aad28..7f55d78dac 100644 --- a/board/google/veyron/Kconfig +++ b/board/google/veyron/Kconfig @@ -45,3 +45,19 @@ config BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS # dummy def_bool y endif + +if TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY + +config SYS_BOARD + default "veyron" + +config SYS_VENDOR + default "google" + +config SYS_CONFIG_NAME + default "veyron" + +config BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS # dummy + def_bool y + +endif diff --git a/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig b/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..8789b56f37 --- /dev/null +++ b/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig @@ -0,0 +1,96 @@ +CONFIG_ARM=y +CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP=y +CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE=0x00100000 +CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_F_LEN=0x2000 +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288=y +# CONFIG_SPL_MMC_SUPPORT is not set +CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY=y +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_FLASH_SUPPORT=y +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_SUPPORT=y +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R_ADDR=0x80000 +CONFIG_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE="rk3288-veyron-speedy" +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART=y +# CONFIG_ANDROID_BOOT_IMAGE is not set +CONFIG_SILENT_CONSOLE=y +# CONFIG_DISPLAY_CPUINFO is not set +CONFIG_DISPLAY_BOARDINFO_LATE=y +CONFIG_BOARD_EARLY_INIT_F=y +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R=y +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R_MALLOC_SIMPLE_LEN=0x2000 +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD=y +CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH=y +CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH_MMC_DEV=0 +CONFIG_CMD_GPIO=y +CONFIG_CMD_GPT=y +CONFIG_CMD_I2C=y +CONFIG_CMD_MMC=y +CONFIG_CMD_SF=y +CONFIG_CMD_SF_TEST=y +CONFIG_CMD_SPI=y +CONFIG_CMD_USB=y +# CONFIG_CMD_SETEXPR is not set +CONFIG_CMD_CACHE=y +CONFIG_CMD_TIME=y +CONFIG_CMD_PMIC=y +CONFIG_CMD_REGULATOR=y +# CONFIG_SPL_DOS_PARTITION is not set +# CONFIG_SPL_EFI_PARTITION is not set +CONFIG_SPL_PARTITION_UUIDS=y +CONFIG_SPL_OF_CONTROL=y +CONFIG_OF_SPL_REMOVE_PROPS="pinctrl-0 pinctrl-names clock-names interrupt-parent assigned-clocks assigned-clock-rates assigned-clock-parents" +CONFIG_SPL_OF_PLATDATA=y +CONFIG_REGMAP=y +CONFIG_SPL_REGMAP=y +CONFIG_SYSCON=y +CONFIG_SPL_SYSCON=y +# CONFIG_SPL_SIMPLE_BUS is not set +CONFIG_CLK=y +CONFIG_SPL_CLK=y +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_GPIO=y +CONFIG_I2C_CROS_EC_TUNNEL=y +CONFIG_SYS_I2C_ROCKCHIP=y +CONFIG_I2C_MUX=y +CONFIG_DM_KEYBOARD=y +CONFIG_CROS_EC_KEYB=y +CONFIG_CROS_EC=y +CONFIG_CROS_EC_SPI=y +CONFIG_PWRSEQ=y +CONFIG_MMC_DW=y +CONFIG_MMC_DW_ROCKCHIP=y +CONFIG_PINCTRL=y +CONFIG_SPL_PINCTRL=y +# CONFIG_SPL_PINCTRL_FULL is not set +CONFIG_PINCTRL_ROCKCHIP_RK3288=y +CONFIG_DM_PMIC=y +# CONFIG_SPL_PMIC_CHILDREN is not set +CONFIG_PMIC_RK8XX=y +CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_FIXED=y +CONFIG_REGULATOR_RK8XX=y +CONFIG_PWM_ROCKCHIP=y +CONFIG_RAM=y +CONFIG_SPL_RAM=y +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_BASE=0xff690000 +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_CLOCK=24000000 +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_SHIFT=2 +CONFIG_SYS_NS16550=y +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SERIAL=y +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SPI=y +CONFIG_SYSRESET=y +CONFIG_USB=y +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_USB2_PHY=y +CONFIG_USB_STORAGE=y +CONFIG_USB_GADGET=y +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_MANUFACTURER="Rockchip" +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_VENDOR_NUM=0x2207 +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_PRODUCT_NUM=0x320a +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_DWC2_OTG=y +CONFIG_USB_FUNCTION_MASS_STORAGE=y +CONFIG_DM_VIDEO=y +CONFIG_DISPLAY=y +CONFIG_VIDEO_ROCKCHIP=y +CONFIG_DISPLAY_ROCKCHIP_EDP=y +CONFIG_DISPLAY_ROCKCHIP_HDMI=y +CONFIG_USE_TINY_PRINTF=y +CONFIG_CMD_DHRYSTONE=y +CONFIG_ERRNO_STR=y +# CONFIG_SPL_OF_LIBFDT is not set -- 2.17.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] rockchip: add support for veyron-speedy (ASUS Chromebook C201) 2018-05-06 14:25 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer (?) @ 2018-05-06 22:12 ` klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com 2018-05-07 0:20 ` Marty E. Plummer -1 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread From: klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com @ 2018-05-06 22:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot > On 06.05.2018, at 16:25, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > This adds support for the ASUS C201, a RK3288-based clamshell > device. The device tree comes from linus's linux tree at > 87ef12027b9b1dd0e0b12cf311fbcb19f9d92539. The SDRAM parameters > are for 4GB Samsung LPDDR3, decoded from coreboot's > src/mainboard/google/veyron/sdram_inf/sdram-lpddr3-samsung-4GB.inc > > Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > --- > arch/arm/dts/Makefile | 1 + > arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts | 189 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c | 3 +- > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig | 11 ++ > board/google/veyron/Kconfig | 16 ++ > configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig | 96 +++++++++++ > 6 files changed, 315 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > create mode 100644 arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts > create mode 100644 configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig > > diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile > index ac7667b1e8..ee04d9bedd 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile > +++ b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile > @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += \ > rk3288-veyron-jerry.dtb \ > rk3288-veyron-mickey.dtb \ > rk3288-veyron-minnie.dtb \ > + rk3288-veyron-speedy.dtb \ > rk3288-vyasa.dtb \ > rk3328-evb.dtb \ > rk3368-lion.dtb \ > diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000000..d5383cef0d > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts This file looks quite different then the one I see on kernel.org with that revision id. So you are sure you imported that one? > @@ -0,0 +1,189 @@ > +/* > + * Google Veyron Speedy Rev 1+ board device tree source > + * > + * Copyright 2015 Google, Inc > + * > + * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 This file is dual licensed upstream, keep it that way. The comment will claim it’s a X11 license but the license text below is actually MIT so you may want to use the MIT SPDX tag for that. > + */ > + > +/dts-v1/; > +#include "rk3288-veyron-chromebook.dtsi" > +#include "cros-ec-sbs.dtsi" > + > +/ { > + model = "Google Speedy"; > + compatible = "google,veyron-speedy-rev9", "google,veyron-speedy-rev8", > + "google,veyron-speedy-rev7", "google,veyron-speedy-rev6", > + "google,veyron-speedy-rev5", "google,veyron-speedy-rev4", > + "google,veyron-speedy-rev3", "google,veyron-speedy-rev2", > + "google,veyron-speedy", "google,veyron", "rockchip,rk3288"; > + > + chosen { > + stdout-path = &uart2; > + }; > + > + panel_regulator: panel-regulator { > + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; > + enable-active-high; > + gpio = <&gpio7 RK_PB6 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > + pinctrl-0 = <&lcd_enable_h>; > + regulator-name = "panel_regulator"; > + startup-delay-us = <100000>; > + vin-supply = <&vcc33_sys>; > + }; > + > + vcc18_lcd: vcc18-lcd { > + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; > + enable-active-high; > + gpio = <&gpio2 RK_PB5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > + pinctrl-0 = <&avdd_1v8_disp_en>; > + regulator-name = "vcc18_lcd"; > + regulator-always-on; > + regulator-boot-on; > + vin-supply = <&vcc18_wl>; > + }; > + > + backlight_regulator: backlight-regulator { > + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; > + enable-active-high; > + gpio = <&gpio2 RK_PB4 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > + pinctrl-0 = <&bl_pwr_en>; > + regulator-name = "backlight_regulator"; > + vin-supply = <&vcc33_sys>; > + startup-delay-us = <15000>; > + }; > +}; > + > +&dmc { > + rockchip,pctl-timing = <0x215 0xc8 0x0 0x35 0x26 0x2 0x70 0x2000d > + 0x6 0x0 0x8 0x4 0x17 0x24 0xd 0x6 > + 0x4 0x8 0x4 0x76 0x4 0x0 0x30 0x0 > + 0x1 0x2 0x2 0x4 0x0 0x0 0xc0 0x4 > + 0x8 0x1f4>; > + rockchip,phy-timing = <0x48d7dd93 0x187008d8 0x121076 > + 0x0 0xc3 0x6 0x1>; > + rockchip,sdram-params = <0x20D266A4 0x5B6 6 533000000 6 13 0>; > +}; Not sure if this should go into a separate dtsi. One of the maintainer will have a preferred way I think, so lets see what they will add. > +&gpio_keys { > + power { > + gpios = <&gpio0 RK_PA5 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; > + }; > +}; > + > +&backlight { > + power-supply = <&backlight_regulator>; > +}; > + > +&panel { > + power-supply = <&panel_regulator>; > +}; > + > +&rk808 { > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > + pinctrl-0 = <&pmic_int_l>; > +}; > + > +&sdmmc { > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > + pinctrl-0 = <&sdmmc_clk &sdmmc_cmd &sdmmc_cd_disabled &sdmmc_cd_gpio > + &sdmmc_bus4>; > + disable-wp; > +}; > + > +&vcc_5v { > + enable-active-high; > + gpio = <&gpio7 RK_PC5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > + pinctrl-0 = <&drv_5v>; > +}; > + > +&vcc50_hdmi { > + enable-active-high; > + gpio = <&gpio5 RK_PC3 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > + pinctrl-0 = <&vcc50_hdmi_en>; > +}; > + > +&edp { > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > + pinctrl-0 = <&edp_hpd>; > +}; > + > +&pinctrl { > + backlight { > + bl_pwr_en: bl_pwr_en { > + rockchip,pins = <2 12 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > + }; > + }; > + > + buck-5v { > + drv_5v: drv-5v { > + rockchip,pins = <7 21 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > + }; > + }; > + > + edp { > + edp_hpd: edp_hpd { > + rockchip,pins = <7 11 RK_FUNC_2 &pcfg_pull_down>; > + }; > + }; > + > + emmc { > + /* Make sure eMMC is not in reset */ > + emmc_deassert_reset: emmc-deassert-reset { > + rockchip,pins = <2 9 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > + }; > + }; > + > + hdmi { > + vcc50_hdmi_en: vcc50-hdmi-en { > + rockchip,pins = <5 19 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > + }; > + }; > + > + lcd { > + lcd_enable_h: lcd-en { > + rockchip,pins = <7 14 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > + }; > + > + avdd_1v8_disp_en: avdd-1v8-disp-en { > + rockchip,pins = <2 13 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > + }; > + }; > + > + pmic { > + dvs_1: dvs-1 { > + rockchip,pins = <7 12 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_down>; > + }; > + > + dvs_2: dvs-2 { > + rockchip,pins = <7 15 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_down>; > + }; > + }; > +}; > + > +&i2c4 { > + status = "okay"; > + > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > + pinctrl-0 = <&i2c4_xfer>; > + > + trackpad at 15 { > + compatible = "elan,i2c_touchpad"; > + interrupt-parent = <&gpio7>; > + interrupts = <3 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING>; > + /* > + * Remove the inherited pinctrl settings to avoid clashing > + * with bus-wide ones. > + */ > + /delete-property/pinctrl-names; > + /delete-property/pinctrl-0; > + reg = <0x15>; > + vcc-supply = <&vcc33_io>; > + wakeup-source; > + }; > +}; > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c > index f3ea624277..9ae4802647 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c > @@ -72,7 +72,8 @@ u32 spl_boot_device(void) > fallback: > #elif defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_JERRY) || \ > defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBIT_MICKEY) || \ > - defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE) > + defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE) || \ > + defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY) > return BOOT_DEVICE_SPI; > #endif > return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1; > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig > index 6beb26fd7a..8d1d37895d 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig > @@ -30,6 +30,17 @@ config TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE > functions. It includes 2 or 4GB of SDRAM and 16 or 32GB of > internal MMC. The product name is ASUS Chromebook Flip. > > +config TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY > + bool "Google/Rockchip Veyron-Speedy Chromebook" > + select BOARD_LATE_INIT > + help > + Speedy is a RK3288-based clamshell device with 2 USB 2.0 ports, > + micro HDMI, an 11.6 inch display, micro-SD card, > + HD camera, touchpad, wifi and Bluetooth. It includes a Chrome OS > + EC (Cortex-M3) to provide access to the keyboard and battery > + functions. It includes 2 or 4GB of SDRAM and 16GB of internal MMC. > + The product name is Asus Chromebook C201PA. > + > config TARGET_EVB_RK3288 > bool "Evb-RK3288" > select BOARD_LATE_INIT > diff --git a/board/google/veyron/Kconfig b/board/google/veyron/Kconfig > index 770e9aad28..7f55d78dac 100644 > --- a/board/google/veyron/Kconfig > +++ b/board/google/veyron/Kconfig > @@ -45,3 +45,19 @@ config BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS # dummy > def_bool y > > endif > + > +if TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY > + > +config SYS_BOARD > + default "veyron" > + > +config SYS_VENDOR > + default "google" > + > +config SYS_CONFIG_NAME > + default "veyron" > + > +config BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS # dummy > + def_bool y > + > +endif > diff --git a/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig b/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000000..8789b56f37 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig > @@ -0,0 +1,96 @@ > +CONFIG_ARM=y > +CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP=y > +CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE=0x00100000 > +CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_F_LEN=0x2000 > +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288=y > +# CONFIG_SPL_MMC_SUPPORT is not set > +CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY=y > +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_FLASH_SUPPORT=y > +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_SUPPORT=y > +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R_ADDR=0x80000 > +CONFIG_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE="rk3288-veyron-speedy" > +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART=y > +# CONFIG_ANDROID_BOOT_IMAGE is not set > +CONFIG_SILENT_CONSOLE=y > +# CONFIG_DISPLAY_CPUINFO is not set > +CONFIG_DISPLAY_BOARDINFO_LATE=y > +CONFIG_BOARD_EARLY_INIT_F=y > +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R=y > +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R_MALLOC_SIMPLE_LEN=0x2000 > +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD=y > +CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH=y > +CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH_MMC_DEV=0 > +CONFIG_CMD_GPIO=y > +CONFIG_CMD_GPT=y > +CONFIG_CMD_I2C=y > +CONFIG_CMD_MMC=y > +CONFIG_CMD_SF=y > +CONFIG_CMD_SF_TEST=y > +CONFIG_CMD_SPI=y > +CONFIG_CMD_USB=y > +# CONFIG_CMD_SETEXPR is not set > +CONFIG_CMD_CACHE=y > +CONFIG_CMD_TIME=y > +CONFIG_CMD_PMIC=y > +CONFIG_CMD_REGULATOR=y > +# CONFIG_SPL_DOS_PARTITION is not set > +# CONFIG_SPL_EFI_PARTITION is not set > +CONFIG_SPL_PARTITION_UUIDS=y > +CONFIG_SPL_OF_CONTROL=y > +CONFIG_OF_SPL_REMOVE_PROPS="pinctrl-0 pinctrl-names clock-names interrupt-parent assigned-clocks assigned-clock-rates assigned-clock-parents" > +CONFIG_SPL_OF_PLATDATA=y > +CONFIG_REGMAP=y > +CONFIG_SPL_REGMAP=y > +CONFIG_SYSCON=y > +CONFIG_SPL_SYSCON=y > +# CONFIG_SPL_SIMPLE_BUS is not set > +CONFIG_CLK=y > +CONFIG_SPL_CLK=y > +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_GPIO=y > +CONFIG_I2C_CROS_EC_TUNNEL=y > +CONFIG_SYS_I2C_ROCKCHIP=y > +CONFIG_I2C_MUX=y > +CONFIG_DM_KEYBOARD=y > +CONFIG_CROS_EC_KEYB=y > +CONFIG_CROS_EC=y > +CONFIG_CROS_EC_SPI=y > +CONFIG_PWRSEQ=y > +CONFIG_MMC_DW=y > +CONFIG_MMC_DW_ROCKCHIP=y > +CONFIG_PINCTRL=y > +CONFIG_SPL_PINCTRL=y > +# CONFIG_SPL_PINCTRL_FULL is not set > +CONFIG_PINCTRL_ROCKCHIP_RK3288=y > +CONFIG_DM_PMIC=y > +# CONFIG_SPL_PMIC_CHILDREN is not set > +CONFIG_PMIC_RK8XX=y > +CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_FIXED=y > +CONFIG_REGULATOR_RK8XX=y > +CONFIG_PWM_ROCKCHIP=y > +CONFIG_RAM=y > +CONFIG_SPL_RAM=y > +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_BASE=0xff690000 > +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_CLOCK=24000000 > +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_SHIFT=2 > +CONFIG_SYS_NS16550=y > +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SERIAL=y > +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SPI=y > +CONFIG_SYSRESET=y > +CONFIG_USB=y > +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_USB2_PHY=y > +CONFIG_USB_STORAGE=y > +CONFIG_USB_GADGET=y > +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_MANUFACTURER="Rockchip" > +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_VENDOR_NUM=0x2207 > +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_PRODUCT_NUM=0x320a > +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_DWC2_OTG=y > +CONFIG_USB_FUNCTION_MASS_STORAGE=y > +CONFIG_DM_VIDEO=y > +CONFIG_DISPLAY=y > +CONFIG_VIDEO_ROCKCHIP=y > +CONFIG_DISPLAY_ROCKCHIP_EDP=y > +CONFIG_DISPLAY_ROCKCHIP_HDMI=y > +CONFIG_USE_TINY_PRINTF=y > +CONFIG_CMD_DHRYSTONE=y > +CONFIG_ERRNO_STR=y > +# CONFIG_SPL_OF_LIBFDT is not set > -- > 2.17.0 > > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot at lists.denx.de > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] rockchip: add support for veyron-speedy (ASUS Chromebook C201) 2018-05-06 22:12 ` klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com @ 2018-05-07 0:20 ` Marty E. Plummer 2018-07-13 10:31 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich 0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-07 0:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 12:12:54AM +0200, klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com wrote: > > > On 06.05.2018, at 16:25, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > > > This adds support for the ASUS C201, a RK3288-based clamshell > > device. The device tree comes from linus's linux tree at > > 87ef12027b9b1dd0e0b12cf311fbcb19f9d92539. The SDRAM parameters > > are for 4GB Samsung LPDDR3, decoded from coreboot's > > src/mainboard/google/veyron/sdram_inf/sdram-lpddr3-samsung-4GB.inc > > > > Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > > --- > > arch/arm/dts/Makefile | 1 + > > arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts | 189 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c | 3 +- > > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig | 11 ++ > > board/google/veyron/Kconfig | 16 ++ > > configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig | 96 +++++++++++ > > 6 files changed, 315 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > create mode 100644 arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts > > create mode 100644 configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile > > index ac7667b1e8..ee04d9bedd 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile > > +++ b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile > > @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += \ > > rk3288-veyron-jerry.dtb \ > > rk3288-veyron-mickey.dtb \ > > rk3288-veyron-minnie.dtb \ > > + rk3288-veyron-speedy.dtb \ > > rk3288-vyasa.dtb \ > > rk3328-evb.dtb \ > > rk3368-lion.dtb \ > > diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts > > new file mode 100644 > > index 0000000000..d5383cef0d > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts > > This file looks quite different then the one I see on kernel.org with that revision id. So you are sure you > imported that one? Dafuq... it seems I borked something up in doing the patch juggling to turn my single-commit mess of a patch (you know, the 'get the thing to work branch') into a good patch series I messed up on this one. > > > @@ -0,0 +1,189 @@ > > +/* > > + * Google Veyron Speedy Rev 1+ board device tree source > > + * > > + * Copyright 2015 Google, Inc > > + * > > + * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > This file is dual licensed upstream, keep it that way. > The comment will claim it's a X11 license but the license text below > is actually MIT so you may want to use the MIT SPDX tag for that. > Yeah, I was listening in on the convo on irc. So, even though it 'says' its GPL/X11, the actual license text is MIT, so I should use that tag? Its not my code, obviously, so I have no dog in that race anyways. > > + */ > > + > > +/dts-v1/; > > +#include "rk3288-veyron-chromebook.dtsi" > > +#include "cros-ec-sbs.dtsi" > > + > > +/ { > > + model = "Google Speedy"; > > + compatible = "google,veyron-speedy-rev9", "google,veyron-speedy-rev8", > > + "google,veyron-speedy-rev7", "google,veyron-speedy-rev6", > > + "google,veyron-speedy-rev5", "google,veyron-speedy-rev4", > > + "google,veyron-speedy-rev3", "google,veyron-speedy-rev2", > > + "google,veyron-speedy", "google,veyron", "rockchip,rk3288"; > > + > > + chosen { > > + stdout-path = &uart2; > > + }; > > + > > + panel_regulator: panel-regulator { > > + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; > > + enable-active-high; > > + gpio = <&gpio7 RK_PB6 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > > + pinctrl-0 = <&lcd_enable_h>; > > + regulator-name = "panel_regulator"; > > + startup-delay-us = <100000>; > > + vin-supply = <&vcc33_sys>; > > + }; > > + > > + vcc18_lcd: vcc18-lcd { > > + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; > > + enable-active-high; > > + gpio = <&gpio2 RK_PB5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > > + pinctrl-0 = <&avdd_1v8_disp_en>; > > + regulator-name = "vcc18_lcd"; > > + regulator-always-on; > > + regulator-boot-on; > > + vin-supply = <&vcc18_wl>; > > + }; > > + > > + backlight_regulator: backlight-regulator { > > + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; > > + enable-active-high; > > + gpio = <&gpio2 RK_PB4 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > > + pinctrl-0 = <&bl_pwr_en>; > > + regulator-name = "backlight_regulator"; > > + vin-supply = <&vcc33_sys>; > > + startup-delay-us = <15000>; > > + }; > > +}; > > + > > +&dmc { > > + rockchip,pctl-timing = <0x215 0xc8 0x0 0x35 0x26 0x2 0x70 0x2000d > > + 0x6 0x0 0x8 0x4 0x17 0x24 0xd 0x6 > > + 0x4 0x8 0x4 0x76 0x4 0x0 0x30 0x0 > > + 0x1 0x2 0x2 0x4 0x0 0x0 0xc0 0x4 > > + 0x8 0x1f4>; > > + rockchip,phy-timing = <0x48d7dd93 0x187008d8 0x121076 > > + 0x0 0xc3 0x6 0x1>; > > + rockchip,sdram-params = <0x20D266A4 0x5B6 6 533000000 6 13 0>; > > +}; > > Not sure if this should go into a separate dtsi. One of the maintainer will have > a preferred way I think, so lets see what they will add. > Yeah, that is possible. However, here I just followed the example of rk3288-veyron-jerry.dtsi, which I (perhaps wrongly) assume can come in other memory size variants. > > +&gpio_keys { > > + power { > > + gpios = <&gpio0 RK_PA5 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; > > + }; > > +}; > > + > > +&backlight { > > + power-supply = <&backlight_regulator>; > > +}; > > + > > +&panel { > > + power-supply = <&panel_regulator>; > > +}; > > + > > +&rk808 { > > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > > + pinctrl-0 = <&pmic_int_l>; > > +}; > > + > > +&sdmmc { > > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > > + pinctrl-0 = <&sdmmc_clk &sdmmc_cmd &sdmmc_cd_disabled &sdmmc_cd_gpio > > + &sdmmc_bus4>; > > + disable-wp; > > +}; > > + > > +&vcc_5v { > > + enable-active-high; > > + gpio = <&gpio7 RK_PC5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > > + pinctrl-0 = <&drv_5v>; > > +}; > > + > > +&vcc50_hdmi { > > + enable-active-high; > > + gpio = <&gpio5 RK_PC3 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > > + pinctrl-0 = <&vcc50_hdmi_en>; > > +}; > > + > > +&edp { > > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > > + pinctrl-0 = <&edp_hpd>; > > +}; > > + > > +&pinctrl { > > + backlight { > > + bl_pwr_en: bl_pwr_en { > > + rockchip,pins = <2 12 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > > + }; > > + }; > > + > > + buck-5v { > > + drv_5v: drv-5v { > > + rockchip,pins = <7 21 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > > + }; > > + }; > > + > > + edp { > > + edp_hpd: edp_hpd { > > + rockchip,pins = <7 11 RK_FUNC_2 &pcfg_pull_down>; > > + }; > > + }; > > + > > + emmc { > > + /* Make sure eMMC is not in reset */ > > + emmc_deassert_reset: emmc-deassert-reset { > > + rockchip,pins = <2 9 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > > + }; > > + }; > > + > > + hdmi { > > + vcc50_hdmi_en: vcc50-hdmi-en { > > + rockchip,pins = <5 19 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > > + }; > > + }; > > + > > + lcd { > > + lcd_enable_h: lcd-en { > > + rockchip,pins = <7 14 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > > + }; > > + > > + avdd_1v8_disp_en: avdd-1v8-disp-en { > > + rockchip,pins = <2 13 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > > + }; > > + }; > > + > > + pmic { > > + dvs_1: dvs-1 { > > + rockchip,pins = <7 12 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_down>; > > + }; > > + > > + dvs_2: dvs-2 { > > + rockchip,pins = <7 15 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_down>; > > + }; > > + }; > > +}; > > + > > +&i2c4 { > > + status = "okay"; > > + > > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > > + pinctrl-0 = <&i2c4_xfer>; > > + > > + trackpad at 15 { > > + compatible = "elan,i2c_touchpad"; > > + interrupt-parent = <&gpio7>; > > + interrupts = <3 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING>; > > + /* > > + * Remove the inherited pinctrl settings to avoid clashing > > + * with bus-wide ones. > > + */ > > + /delete-property/pinctrl-names; > > + /delete-property/pinctrl-0; > > + reg = <0x15>; > > + vcc-supply = <&vcc33_io>; > > + wakeup-source; > > + }; > > +}; > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c > > index f3ea624277..9ae4802647 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c > > @@ -72,7 +72,8 @@ u32 spl_boot_device(void) > > fallback: > > #elif defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_JERRY) || \ > > defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBIT_MICKEY) || \ > > - defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE) > > + defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE) || \ > > + defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY) > > return BOOT_DEVICE_SPI; > > #endif > > return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1; > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig > > index 6beb26fd7a..8d1d37895d 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig > > @@ -30,6 +30,17 @@ config TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE > > functions. It includes 2 or 4GB of SDRAM and 16 or 32GB of > > internal MMC. The product name is ASUS Chromebook Flip. > > > > +config TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY > > + bool "Google/Rockchip Veyron-Speedy Chromebook" > > + select BOARD_LATE_INIT > > + help > > + Speedy is a RK3288-based clamshell device with 2 USB 2.0 ports, > > + micro HDMI, an 11.6 inch display, micro-SD card, > > + HD camera, touchpad, wifi and Bluetooth. It includes a Chrome OS > > + EC (Cortex-M3) to provide access to the keyboard and battery > > + functions. It includes 2 or 4GB of SDRAM and 16GB of internal MMC. > > + The product name is Asus Chromebook C201PA. > > + > > config TARGET_EVB_RK3288 > > bool "Evb-RK3288" > > select BOARD_LATE_INIT > > diff --git a/board/google/veyron/Kconfig b/board/google/veyron/Kconfig > > index 770e9aad28..7f55d78dac 100644 > > --- a/board/google/veyron/Kconfig > > +++ b/board/google/veyron/Kconfig > > @@ -45,3 +45,19 @@ config BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS # dummy > > def_bool y > > > > endif > > + > > +if TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY > > + > > +config SYS_BOARD > > + default "veyron" > > + > > +config SYS_VENDOR > > + default "google" > > + > > +config SYS_CONFIG_NAME > > + default "veyron" > > + > > +config BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS # dummy > > + def_bool y > > + > > +endif > > diff --git a/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig b/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig > > new file mode 100644 > > index 0000000000..8789b56f37 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig > > @@ -0,0 +1,96 @@ > > +CONFIG_ARM=y > > +CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP=y > > +CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE=0x00100000 > > +CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_F_LEN=0x2000 > > +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288=y > > +# CONFIG_SPL_MMC_SUPPORT is not set > > +CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_FLASH_SUPPORT=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_SUPPORT=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R_ADDR=0x80000 > > +CONFIG_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE="rk3288-veyron-speedy" > > +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART=y > > +# CONFIG_ANDROID_BOOT_IMAGE is not set > > +CONFIG_SILENT_CONSOLE=y > > +# CONFIG_DISPLAY_CPUINFO is not set > > +CONFIG_DISPLAY_BOARDINFO_LATE=y > > +CONFIG_BOARD_EARLY_INIT_F=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R_MALLOC_SIMPLE_LEN=0x2000 > > +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD=y > > +CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH=y > > +CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH_MMC_DEV=0 > > +CONFIG_CMD_GPIO=y > > +CONFIG_CMD_GPT=y > > +CONFIG_CMD_I2C=y > > +CONFIG_CMD_MMC=y > > +CONFIG_CMD_SF=y > > +CONFIG_CMD_SF_TEST=y > > +CONFIG_CMD_SPI=y > > +CONFIG_CMD_USB=y > > +# CONFIG_CMD_SETEXPR is not set > > +CONFIG_CMD_CACHE=y > > +CONFIG_CMD_TIME=y > > +CONFIG_CMD_PMIC=y > > +CONFIG_CMD_REGULATOR=y > > +# CONFIG_SPL_DOS_PARTITION is not set > > +# CONFIG_SPL_EFI_PARTITION is not set > > +CONFIG_SPL_PARTITION_UUIDS=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_OF_CONTROL=y > > +CONFIG_OF_SPL_REMOVE_PROPS="pinctrl-0 pinctrl-names clock-names interrupt-parent assigned-clocks assigned-clock-rates assigned-clock-parents" > > +CONFIG_SPL_OF_PLATDATA=y > > +CONFIG_REGMAP=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_REGMAP=y > > +CONFIG_SYSCON=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_SYSCON=y > > +# CONFIG_SPL_SIMPLE_BUS is not set > > +CONFIG_CLK=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_CLK=y > > +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_GPIO=y > > +CONFIG_I2C_CROS_EC_TUNNEL=y > > +CONFIG_SYS_I2C_ROCKCHIP=y > > +CONFIG_I2C_MUX=y > > +CONFIG_DM_KEYBOARD=y > > +CONFIG_CROS_EC_KEYB=y > > +CONFIG_CROS_EC=y > > +CONFIG_CROS_EC_SPI=y > > +CONFIG_PWRSEQ=y > > +CONFIG_MMC_DW=y > > +CONFIG_MMC_DW_ROCKCHIP=y > > +CONFIG_PINCTRL=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_PINCTRL=y > > +# CONFIG_SPL_PINCTRL_FULL is not set > > +CONFIG_PINCTRL_ROCKCHIP_RK3288=y > > +CONFIG_DM_PMIC=y > > +# CONFIG_SPL_PMIC_CHILDREN is not set > > +CONFIG_PMIC_RK8XX=y > > +CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_FIXED=y > > +CONFIG_REGULATOR_RK8XX=y > > +CONFIG_PWM_ROCKCHIP=y > > +CONFIG_RAM=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_RAM=y > > +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_BASE=0xff690000 > > +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_CLOCK=24000000 > > +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_SHIFT=2 > > +CONFIG_SYS_NS16550=y > > +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SERIAL=y > > +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SPI=y > > +CONFIG_SYSRESET=y > > +CONFIG_USB=y > > +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_USB2_PHY=y > > +CONFIG_USB_STORAGE=y > > +CONFIG_USB_GADGET=y > > +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_MANUFACTURER="Rockchip" > > +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_VENDOR_NUM=0x2207 > > +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_PRODUCT_NUM=0x320a > > +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_DWC2_OTG=y > > +CONFIG_USB_FUNCTION_MASS_STORAGE=y > > +CONFIG_DM_VIDEO=y > > +CONFIG_DISPLAY=y > > +CONFIG_VIDEO_ROCKCHIP=y > > +CONFIG_DISPLAY_ROCKCHIP_EDP=y > > +CONFIG_DISPLAY_ROCKCHIP_HDMI=y > > +CONFIG_USE_TINY_PRINTF=y > > +CONFIG_CMD_DHRYSTONE=y > > +CONFIG_ERRNO_STR=y > > +# CONFIG_SPL_OF_LIBFDT is not set > > -- > > 2.17.0 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > U-Boot mailing list > > U-Boot at lists.denx.de > > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] rockchip: add support for veyron-speedy (ASUS Chromebook C201) 2018-05-07 0:20 ` Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-07-13 10:31 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich 2018-07-24 5:12 ` Marty E. Plummer 0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-07-13 10:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot > On 7 May 2018, at 02:20, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 12:12:54AM +0200, klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com <mailto:klaus.goger@theobroma-systems.com> wrote: >> >>> On 06.05.2018, at 16:25, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> This adds support for the ASUS C201, a RK3288-based clamshell >>> device. The device tree comes from linus's linux tree at >>> 87ef12027b9b1dd0e0b12cf311fbcb19f9d92539. The SDRAM parameters >>> are for 4GB Samsung LPDDR3, decoded from coreboot's >>> src/mainboard/google/veyron/sdram_inf/sdram-lpddr3-samsung-4GB.inc >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>> --- >>> arch/arm/dts/Makefile | 1 + >>> arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts | 189 ++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c | 3 +- >>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig | 11 ++ >>> board/google/veyron/Kconfig | 16 ++ >>> configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig | 96 +++++++++++ >>> 6 files changed, 315 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> create mode 100644 arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts >>> create mode 100644 configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile >>> index ac7667b1e8..ee04d9bedd 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile >>> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile >>> @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += \ >>> rk3288-veyron-jerry.dtb \ >>> rk3288-veyron-mickey.dtb \ >>> rk3288-veyron-minnie.dtb \ >>> + rk3288-veyron-speedy.dtb \ >>> rk3288-vyasa.dtb \ >>> rk3328-evb.dtb \ >>> rk3368-lion.dtb \ >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 0000000000..d5383cef0d >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts >> >> This file looks quite different then the one I see on kernel.org with that revision id. So you are sure you >> imported that one? > Dafuq... it seems I borked something up in doing the patch juggling to > turn my single-commit mess of a patch (you know, the 'get the thing to > work branch') into a good patch series I messed up on this one. >> >>> @@ -0,0 +1,189 @@ >>> +/* >>> + * Google Veyron Speedy Rev 1+ board device tree source >>> + * >>> + * Copyright 2015 Google, Inc >>> + * >>> + * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 >> >> This file is dual licensed upstream, keep it that way. >> The comment will claim it's a X11 license but the license text below >> is actually MIT so you may want to use the MIT SPDX tag for that. >> > Yeah, I was listening in on the convo on irc. So, even though it 'says' > its GPL/X11, the actual license text is MIT, so I should use that tag? > Its not my code, obviously, so I have no dog in that race anyways. >>> + */ >>> + >>> +/dts-v1/; >>> +#include "rk3288-veyron-chromebook.dtsi" >>> +#include "cros-ec-sbs.dtsi" >>> + >>> +/ { >>> + model = "Google Speedy"; >>> + compatible = "google,veyron-speedy-rev9", "google,veyron-speedy-rev8", >>> + "google,veyron-speedy-rev7", "google,veyron-speedy-rev6", >>> + "google,veyron-speedy-rev5", "google,veyron-speedy-rev4", >>> + "google,veyron-speedy-rev3", "google,veyron-speedy-rev2", >>> + "google,veyron-speedy", "google,veyron", "rockchip,rk3288"; >>> + >>> + chosen { >>> + stdout-path = &uart2; >>> + }; >>> + >>> + panel_regulator: panel-regulator { >>> + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; >>> + enable-active-high; >>> + gpio = <&gpio7 RK_PB6 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&lcd_enable_h>; >>> + regulator-name = "panel_regulator"; >>> + startup-delay-us = <100000>; >>> + vin-supply = <&vcc33_sys>; >>> + }; >>> + >>> + vcc18_lcd: vcc18-lcd { >>> + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; >>> + enable-active-high; >>> + gpio = <&gpio2 RK_PB5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&avdd_1v8_disp_en>; >>> + regulator-name = "vcc18_lcd"; >>> + regulator-always-on; >>> + regulator-boot-on; >>> + vin-supply = <&vcc18_wl>; >>> + }; >>> + >>> + backlight_regulator: backlight-regulator { >>> + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; >>> + enable-active-high; >>> + gpio = <&gpio2 RK_PB4 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&bl_pwr_en>; >>> + regulator-name = "backlight_regulator"; >>> + vin-supply = <&vcc33_sys>; >>> + startup-delay-us = <15000>; >>> + }; >>> +}; >>> + >>> +&dmc { >>> + rockchip,pctl-timing = <0x215 0xc8 0x0 0x35 0x26 0x2 0x70 0x2000d >>> + 0x6 0x0 0x8 0x4 0x17 0x24 0xd 0x6 >>> + 0x4 0x8 0x4 0x76 0x4 0x0 0x30 0x0 >>> + 0x1 0x2 0x2 0x4 0x0 0x0 0xc0 0x4 >>> + 0x8 0x1f4>; >>> + rockchip,phy-timing = <0x48d7dd93 0x187008d8 0x121076 >>> + 0x0 0xc3 0x6 0x1>; >>> + rockchip,sdram-params = <0x20D266A4 0x5B6 6 533000000 6 13 0>; >>> +}; >> >> Not sure if this should go into a separate dtsi. One of the maintainer will have >> a preferred way I think, so lets see what they will add. >> > Yeah, that is possible. However, here I just followed the example of > rk3288-veyron-jerry.dtsi, which I (perhaps wrongly) assume can come in > other memory size variants. Having a “-u-boot.dtsi” is the current practice (counting 85 such files as of today). We should follow this model here as well for any new devices we add. >>> +&gpio_keys { >>> + power { >>> + gpios = <&gpio0 RK_PA5 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; >>> + }; >>> +}; >>> + >>> +&backlight { >>> + power-supply = <&backlight_regulator>; >>> +}; >>> + >>> +&panel { >>> + power-supply = <&panel_regulator>; >>> +}; >>> + >>> +&rk808 { >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&pmic_int_l>; >>> +}; >>> + >>> +&sdmmc { >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&sdmmc_clk &sdmmc_cmd &sdmmc_cd_disabled &sdmmc_cd_gpio >>> + &sdmmc_bus4>; >>> + disable-wp; >>> +}; >>> + >>> +&vcc_5v { >>> + enable-active-high; >>> + gpio = <&gpio7 RK_PC5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&drv_5v>; >>> +}; >>> + >>> +&vcc50_hdmi { >>> + enable-active-high; >>> + gpio = <&gpio5 RK_PC3 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&vcc50_hdmi_en>; >>> +}; >>> + >>> +&edp { >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&edp_hpd>; >>> +}; >>> + >>> +&pinctrl { >>> + backlight { >>> + bl_pwr_en: bl_pwr_en { >>> + rockchip,pins = <2 12 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; >>> + }; >>> + }; >>> + >>> + buck-5v { >>> + drv_5v: drv-5v { >>> + rockchip,pins = <7 21 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; >>> + }; >>> + }; >>> + >>> + edp { >>> + edp_hpd: edp_hpd { >>> + rockchip,pins = <7 11 RK_FUNC_2 &pcfg_pull_down>; >>> + }; >>> + }; >>> + >>> + emmc { >>> + /* Make sure eMMC is not in reset */ >>> + emmc_deassert_reset: emmc-deassert-reset { >>> + rockchip,pins = <2 9 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; >>> + }; >>> + }; >>> + >>> + hdmi { >>> + vcc50_hdmi_en: vcc50-hdmi-en { >>> + rockchip,pins = <5 19 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; >>> + }; >>> + }; >>> + >>> + lcd { >>> + lcd_enable_h: lcd-en { >>> + rockchip,pins = <7 14 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; >>> + }; >>> + >>> + avdd_1v8_disp_en: avdd-1v8-disp-en { >>> + rockchip,pins = <2 13 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; >>> + }; >>> + }; >>> + >>> + pmic { >>> + dvs_1: dvs-1 { >>> + rockchip,pins = <7 12 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_down>; >>> + }; >>> + >>> + dvs_2: dvs-2 { >>> + rockchip,pins = <7 15 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_down>; >>> + }; >>> + }; >>> +}; >>> + >>> +&i2c4 { >>> + status = "okay"; >>> + >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&i2c4_xfer>; >>> + >>> + trackpad at 15 { >>> + compatible = "elan,i2c_touchpad"; >>> + interrupt-parent = <&gpio7>; >>> + interrupts = <3 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING>; >>> + /* >>> + * Remove the inherited pinctrl settings to avoid clashing >>> + * with bus-wide ones. >>> + */ >>> + /delete-property/pinctrl-names; >>> + /delete-property/pinctrl-0; >>> + reg = <0x15>; >>> + vcc-supply = <&vcc33_io>; >>> + wakeup-source; >>> + }; >>> +}; >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c >>> index f3ea624277..9ae4802647 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c >>> @@ -72,7 +72,8 @@ u32 spl_boot_device(void) >>> fallback: >>> #elif defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_JERRY) || \ >>> defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBIT_MICKEY) || \ >>> - defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE) >>> + defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE) || \ >>> + defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY) >>> return BOOT_DEVICE_SPI; >>> #endif >>> return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1; >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig >>> index 6beb26fd7a..8d1d37895d 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig >>> @@ -30,6 +30,17 @@ config TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE >>> functions. It includes 2 or 4GB of SDRAM and 16 or 32GB of >>> internal MMC. The product name is ASUS Chromebook Flip. >>> >>> +config TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY >>> + bool "Google/Rockchip Veyron-Speedy Chromebook" >>> + select BOARD_LATE_INIT >>> + help >>> + Speedy is a RK3288-based clamshell device with 2 USB 2.0 ports, >>> + micro HDMI, an 11.6 inch display, micro-SD card, >>> + HD camera, touchpad, wifi and Bluetooth. It includes a Chrome OS >>> + EC (Cortex-M3) to provide access to the keyboard and battery >>> + functions. It includes 2 or 4GB of SDRAM and 16GB of internal MMC. >>> + The product name is Asus Chromebook C201PA. >>> + >>> config TARGET_EVB_RK3288 >>> bool "Evb-RK3288" >>> select BOARD_LATE_INIT >>> diff --git a/board/google/veyron/Kconfig b/board/google/veyron/Kconfig >>> index 770e9aad28..7f55d78dac 100644 >>> --- a/board/google/veyron/Kconfig >>> +++ b/board/google/veyron/Kconfig >>> @@ -45,3 +45,19 @@ config BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS # dummy >>> def_bool y >>> >>> endif >>> + >>> +if TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY >>> + >>> +config SYS_BOARD >>> + default "veyron" >>> + >>> +config SYS_VENDOR >>> + default "google" >>> + >>> +config SYS_CONFIG_NAME >>> + default "veyron" >>> + >>> +config BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS # dummy >>> + def_bool y >>> + >>> +endif >>> diff --git a/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig b/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 0000000000..8789b56f37 >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig >>> @@ -0,0 +1,96 @@ >>> +CONFIG_ARM=y >>> +CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP=y >>> +CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE=0x00100000 >>> +CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_F_LEN=0x2000 >>> +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288=y >>> +# CONFIG_SPL_MMC_SUPPORT is not set >>> +CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY=y >>> +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_FLASH_SUPPORT=y >>> +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_SUPPORT=y >>> +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R_ADDR=0x80000 >>> +CONFIG_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE="rk3288-veyron-speedy" >>> +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART=y >>> +# CONFIG_ANDROID_BOOT_IMAGE is not set >>> +CONFIG_SILENT_CONSOLE=y >>> +# CONFIG_DISPLAY_CPUINFO is not set >>> +CONFIG_DISPLAY_BOARDINFO_LATE=y >>> +CONFIG_BOARD_EARLY_INIT_F=y >>> +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R=y >>> +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R_MALLOC_SIMPLE_LEN=0x2000 >>> +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD=y >>> +CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH=y >>> +CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH_MMC_DEV=0 >>> +CONFIG_CMD_GPIO=y >>> +CONFIG_CMD_GPT=y >>> +CONFIG_CMD_I2C=y >>> +CONFIG_CMD_MMC=y >>> +CONFIG_CMD_SF=y >>> +CONFIG_CMD_SF_TEST=y >>> +CONFIG_CMD_SPI=y >>> +CONFIG_CMD_USB=y >>> +# CONFIG_CMD_SETEXPR is not set >>> +CONFIG_CMD_CACHE=y >>> +CONFIG_CMD_TIME=y >>> +CONFIG_CMD_PMIC=y >>> +CONFIG_CMD_REGULATOR=y >>> +# CONFIG_SPL_DOS_PARTITION is not set >>> +# CONFIG_SPL_EFI_PARTITION is not set >>> +CONFIG_SPL_PARTITION_UUIDS=y >>> +CONFIG_SPL_OF_CONTROL=y >>> +CONFIG_OF_SPL_REMOVE_PROPS="pinctrl-0 pinctrl-names clock-names interrupt-parent assigned-clocks assigned-clock-rates assigned-clock-parents" >>> +CONFIG_SPL_OF_PLATDATA=y >>> +CONFIG_REGMAP=y >>> +CONFIG_SPL_REGMAP=y >>> +CONFIG_SYSCON=y >>> +CONFIG_SPL_SYSCON=y >>> +# CONFIG_SPL_SIMPLE_BUS is not set >>> +CONFIG_CLK=y >>> +CONFIG_SPL_CLK=y >>> +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_GPIO=y >>> +CONFIG_I2C_CROS_EC_TUNNEL=y >>> +CONFIG_SYS_I2C_ROCKCHIP=y >>> +CONFIG_I2C_MUX=y >>> +CONFIG_DM_KEYBOARD=y >>> +CONFIG_CROS_EC_KEYB=y >>> +CONFIG_CROS_EC=y >>> +CONFIG_CROS_EC_SPI=y >>> +CONFIG_PWRSEQ=y >>> +CONFIG_MMC_DW=y >>> +CONFIG_MMC_DW_ROCKCHIP=y >>> +CONFIG_PINCTRL=y >>> +CONFIG_SPL_PINCTRL=y >>> +# CONFIG_SPL_PINCTRL_FULL is not set >>> +CONFIG_PINCTRL_ROCKCHIP_RK3288=y >>> +CONFIG_DM_PMIC=y >>> +# CONFIG_SPL_PMIC_CHILDREN is not set >>> +CONFIG_PMIC_RK8XX=y >>> +CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_FIXED=y >>> +CONFIG_REGULATOR_RK8XX=y >>> +CONFIG_PWM_ROCKCHIP=y >>> +CONFIG_RAM=y >>> +CONFIG_SPL_RAM=y >>> +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_BASE=0xff690000 >>> +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_CLOCK=24000000 >>> +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_SHIFT=2 >>> +CONFIG_SYS_NS16550=y >>> +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SERIAL=y >>> +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SPI=y >>> +CONFIG_SYSRESET=y >>> +CONFIG_USB=y >>> +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_USB2_PHY=y >>> +CONFIG_USB_STORAGE=y >>> +CONFIG_USB_GADGET=y >>> +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_MANUFACTURER="Rockchip" >>> +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_VENDOR_NUM=0x2207 >>> +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_PRODUCT_NUM=0x320a >>> +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_DWC2_OTG=y >>> +CONFIG_USB_FUNCTION_MASS_STORAGE=y >>> +CONFIG_DM_VIDEO=y >>> +CONFIG_DISPLAY=y >>> +CONFIG_VIDEO_ROCKCHIP=y >>> +CONFIG_DISPLAY_ROCKCHIP_EDP=y >>> +CONFIG_DISPLAY_ROCKCHIP_HDMI=y >>> +CONFIG_USE_TINY_PRINTF=y >>> +CONFIG_CMD_DHRYSTONE=y >>> +CONFIG_ERRNO_STR=y >>> +# CONFIG_SPL_OF_LIBFDT is not set >>> -- >>> 2.17.0 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> U-Boot mailing list >>> U-Boot at lists.denx.de >>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot >> > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot at lists.denx.de > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] rockchip: add support for veyron-speedy (ASUS Chromebook C201) 2018-07-13 10:31 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-07-24 5:12 ` Marty E. Plummer 2018-07-24 8:05 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich 0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-07-24 5:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 12:31:49PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > > > On 7 May 2018, at 02:20, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 12:12:54AM +0200, klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com <mailto:klaus.goger@theobroma-systems.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On 06.05.2018, at 16:25, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> This adds support for the ASUS C201, a RK3288-based clamshell > >>> device. The device tree comes from linus's linux tree at > >>> 87ef12027b9b1dd0e0b12cf311fbcb19f9d92539. The SDRAM parameters > >>> are for 4GB Samsung LPDDR3, decoded from coreboot's > >>> src/mainboard/google/veyron/sdram_inf/sdram-lpddr3-samsung-4GB.inc > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > >>> --- > >>> arch/arm/dts/Makefile | 1 + > >>> arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts | 189 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c | 3 +- > >>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig | 11 ++ > >>> board/google/veyron/Kconfig | 16 ++ > >>> configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig | 96 +++++++++++ > >>> 6 files changed, 315 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>> create mode 100644 arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts > >>> create mode 100644 configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig > >>> > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile > >>> index ac7667b1e8..ee04d9bedd 100644 > >>> --- a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile > >>> @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += \ > >>> rk3288-veyron-jerry.dtb \ > >>> rk3288-veyron-mickey.dtb \ > >>> rk3288-veyron-minnie.dtb \ > >>> + rk3288-veyron-speedy.dtb \ > >>> rk3288-vyasa.dtb \ > >>> rk3328-evb.dtb \ > >>> rk3368-lion.dtb \ > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts > >>> new file mode 100644 > >>> index 0000000000..d5383cef0d > >>> --- /dev/null > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts > >> > >> This file looks quite different then the one I see on kernel.org with that revision id. So you are sure you > >> imported that one? > > Dafuq... it seems I borked something up in doing the patch juggling to > > turn my single-commit mess of a patch (you know, the 'get the thing to > > work branch') into a good patch series I messed up on this one. > >> > >>> @@ -0,0 +1,189 @@ > >>> +/* > >>> + * Google Veyron Speedy Rev 1+ board device tree source > >>> + * > >>> + * Copyright 2015 Google, Inc > >>> + * > >>> + * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > >> > >> This file is dual licensed upstream, keep it that way. > >> The comment will claim it's a X11 license but the license text below > >> is actually MIT so you may want to use the MIT SPDX tag for that. > >> > > Yeah, I was listening in on the convo on irc. So, even though it 'says' > > its GPL/X11, the actual license text is MIT, so I should use that tag? > > Its not my code, obviously, so I have no dog in that race anyways. > >>> + */ > >>> + > >>> +/dts-v1/; > >>> +#include "rk3288-veyron-chromebook.dtsi" > >>> +#include "cros-ec-sbs.dtsi" > >>> + > >>> +/ { > >>> + model = "Google Speedy"; > >>> + compatible = "google,veyron-speedy-rev9", "google,veyron-speedy-rev8", > >>> + "google,veyron-speedy-rev7", "google,veyron-speedy-rev6", > >>> + "google,veyron-speedy-rev5", "google,veyron-speedy-rev4", > >>> + "google,veyron-speedy-rev3", "google,veyron-speedy-rev2", > >>> + "google,veyron-speedy", "google,veyron", "rockchip,rk3288"; > >>> + > >>> + chosen { > >>> + stdout-path = &uart2; > >>> + }; > >>> + > >>> + panel_regulator: panel-regulator { > >>> + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; > >>> + enable-active-high; > >>> + gpio = <&gpio7 RK_PB6 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; > >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&lcd_enable_h>; > >>> + regulator-name = "panel_regulator"; > >>> + startup-delay-us = <100000>; > >>> + vin-supply = <&vcc33_sys>; > >>> + }; > >>> + > >>> + vcc18_lcd: vcc18-lcd { > >>> + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; > >>> + enable-active-high; > >>> + gpio = <&gpio2 RK_PB5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; > >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&avdd_1v8_disp_en>; > >>> + regulator-name = "vcc18_lcd"; > >>> + regulator-always-on; > >>> + regulator-boot-on; > >>> + vin-supply = <&vcc18_wl>; > >>> + }; > >>> + > >>> + backlight_regulator: backlight-regulator { > >>> + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; > >>> + enable-active-high; > >>> + gpio = <&gpio2 RK_PB4 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; > >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&bl_pwr_en>; > >>> + regulator-name = "backlight_regulator"; > >>> + vin-supply = <&vcc33_sys>; > >>> + startup-delay-us = <15000>; > >>> + }; > >>> +}; > >>> + > >>> +&dmc { > >>> + rockchip,pctl-timing = <0x215 0xc8 0x0 0x35 0x26 0x2 0x70 0x2000d > >>> + 0x6 0x0 0x8 0x4 0x17 0x24 0xd 0x6 > >>> + 0x4 0x8 0x4 0x76 0x4 0x0 0x30 0x0 > >>> + 0x1 0x2 0x2 0x4 0x0 0x0 0xc0 0x4 > >>> + 0x8 0x1f4>; > >>> + rockchip,phy-timing = <0x48d7dd93 0x187008d8 0x121076 > >>> + 0x0 0xc3 0x6 0x1>; > >>> + rockchip,sdram-params = <0x20D266A4 0x5B6 6 533000000 6 13 0>; > >>> +}; > >> > >> Not sure if this should go into a separate dtsi. One of the maintainer will have > >> a preferred way I think, so lets see what they will add. > >> > > Yeah, that is possible. However, here I just followed the example of > > rk3288-veyron-jerry.dtsi, which I (perhaps wrongly) assume can come in > > other memory size variants. > > Having a “-u-boot.dtsi” is the current practice (counting 85 such files as of today). > We should follow this model here as well for any new devices we add. > Fair. So what should go into the -u-boot.dtsi file? everything not standard to the imported dts/dtsi from linux? > >>> +&gpio_keys { > >>> + power { > >>> + gpios = <&gpio0 RK_PA5 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; > >>> + }; > >>> +}; > >>> + > >>> +&backlight { > >>> + power-supply = <&backlight_regulator>; > >>> +}; > >>> + > >>> +&panel { > >>> + power-supply = <&panel_regulator>; > >>> +}; > >>> + > >>> +&rk808 { > >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; > >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&pmic_int_l>; > >>> +}; > >>> + > >>> +&sdmmc { > >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; > >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&sdmmc_clk &sdmmc_cmd &sdmmc_cd_disabled &sdmmc_cd_gpio > >>> + &sdmmc_bus4>; > >>> + disable-wp; > >>> +}; > >>> + > >>> +&vcc_5v { > >>> + enable-active-high; > >>> + gpio = <&gpio7 RK_PC5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; > >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&drv_5v>; > >>> +}; > >>> + > >>> +&vcc50_hdmi { > >>> + enable-active-high; > >>> + gpio = <&gpio5 RK_PC3 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; > >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&vcc50_hdmi_en>; > >>> +}; > >>> + > >>> +&edp { > >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; > >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&edp_hpd>; > >>> +}; > >>> + > >>> +&pinctrl { > >>> + backlight { > >>> + bl_pwr_en: bl_pwr_en { > >>> + rockchip,pins = <2 12 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > >>> + }; > >>> + }; > >>> + > >>> + buck-5v { > >>> + drv_5v: drv-5v { > >>> + rockchip,pins = <7 21 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > >>> + }; > >>> + }; > >>> + > >>> + edp { > >>> + edp_hpd: edp_hpd { > >>> + rockchip,pins = <7 11 RK_FUNC_2 &pcfg_pull_down>; > >>> + }; > >>> + }; > >>> + > >>> + emmc { > >>> + /* Make sure eMMC is not in reset */ > >>> + emmc_deassert_reset: emmc-deassert-reset { > >>> + rockchip,pins = <2 9 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > >>> + }; > >>> + }; > >>> + > >>> + hdmi { > >>> + vcc50_hdmi_en: vcc50-hdmi-en { > >>> + rockchip,pins = <5 19 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > >>> + }; > >>> + }; > >>> + > >>> + lcd { > >>> + lcd_enable_h: lcd-en { > >>> + rockchip,pins = <7 14 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > >>> + }; > >>> + > >>> + avdd_1v8_disp_en: avdd-1v8-disp-en { > >>> + rockchip,pins = <2 13 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; > >>> + }; > >>> + }; > >>> + > >>> + pmic { > >>> + dvs_1: dvs-1 { > >>> + rockchip,pins = <7 12 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_down>; > >>> + }; > >>> + > >>> + dvs_2: dvs-2 { > >>> + rockchip,pins = <7 15 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_down>; > >>> + }; > >>> + }; > >>> +}; > >>> + > >>> +&i2c4 { > >>> + status = "okay"; > >>> + > >>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; > >>> + pinctrl-0 = <&i2c4_xfer>; > >>> + > >>> + trackpad at 15 { > >>> + compatible = "elan,i2c_touchpad"; > >>> + interrupt-parent = <&gpio7>; > >>> + interrupts = <3 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING>; > >>> + /* > >>> + * Remove the inherited pinctrl settings to avoid clashing > >>> + * with bus-wide ones. > >>> + */ > >>> + /delete-property/pinctrl-names; > >>> + /delete-property/pinctrl-0; > >>> + reg = <0x15>; > >>> + vcc-supply = <&vcc33_io>; > >>> + wakeup-source; > >>> + }; > >>> +}; > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c > >>> index f3ea624277..9ae4802647 100644 > >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c > >>> @@ -72,7 +72,8 @@ u32 spl_boot_device(void) > >>> fallback: > >>> #elif defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_JERRY) || \ > >>> defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBIT_MICKEY) || \ > >>> - defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE) > >>> + defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE) || \ > >>> + defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY) > >>> return BOOT_DEVICE_SPI; > >>> #endif > >>> return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1; > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig > >>> index 6beb26fd7a..8d1d37895d 100644 > >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig > >>> @@ -30,6 +30,17 @@ config TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE > >>> functions. It includes 2 or 4GB of SDRAM and 16 or 32GB of > >>> internal MMC. The product name is ASUS Chromebook Flip. > >>> > >>> +config TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY > >>> + bool "Google/Rockchip Veyron-Speedy Chromebook" > >>> + select BOARD_LATE_INIT > >>> + help > >>> + Speedy is a RK3288-based clamshell device with 2 USB 2.0 ports, > >>> + micro HDMI, an 11.6 inch display, micro-SD card, > >>> + HD camera, touchpad, wifi and Bluetooth. It includes a Chrome OS > >>> + EC (Cortex-M3) to provide access to the keyboard and battery > >>> + functions. It includes 2 or 4GB of SDRAM and 16GB of internal MMC. > >>> + The product name is Asus Chromebook C201PA. > >>> + > >>> config TARGET_EVB_RK3288 > >>> bool "Evb-RK3288" > >>> select BOARD_LATE_INIT > >>> diff --git a/board/google/veyron/Kconfig b/board/google/veyron/Kconfig > >>> index 770e9aad28..7f55d78dac 100644 > >>> --- a/board/google/veyron/Kconfig > >>> +++ b/board/google/veyron/Kconfig > >>> @@ -45,3 +45,19 @@ config BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS # dummy > >>> def_bool y > >>> > >>> endif > >>> + > >>> +if TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY > >>> + > >>> +config SYS_BOARD > >>> + default "veyron" > >>> + > >>> +config SYS_VENDOR > >>> + default "google" > >>> + > >>> +config SYS_CONFIG_NAME > >>> + default "veyron" > >>> + > >>> +config BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS # dummy > >>> + def_bool y > >>> + > >>> +endif > >>> diff --git a/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig b/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig > >>> new file mode 100644 > >>> index 0000000000..8789b56f37 > >>> --- /dev/null > >>> +++ b/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig > >>> @@ -0,0 +1,96 @@ > >>> +CONFIG_ARM=y > >>> +CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP=y > >>> +CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE=0x00100000 > >>> +CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_F_LEN=0x2000 > >>> +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288=y > >>> +# CONFIG_SPL_MMC_SUPPORT is not set > >>> +CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY=y > >>> +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_FLASH_SUPPORT=y > >>> +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_SUPPORT=y > >>> +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R_ADDR=0x80000 > >>> +CONFIG_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE="rk3288-veyron-speedy" > >>> +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART=y > >>> +# CONFIG_ANDROID_BOOT_IMAGE is not set > >>> +CONFIG_SILENT_CONSOLE=y > >>> +# CONFIG_DISPLAY_CPUINFO is not set > >>> +CONFIG_DISPLAY_BOARDINFO_LATE=y > >>> +CONFIG_BOARD_EARLY_INIT_F=y > >>> +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R=y > >>> +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R_MALLOC_SIMPLE_LEN=0x2000 > >>> +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD=y > >>> +CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH=y > >>> +CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH_MMC_DEV=0 > >>> +CONFIG_CMD_GPIO=y > >>> +CONFIG_CMD_GPT=y > >>> +CONFIG_CMD_I2C=y > >>> +CONFIG_CMD_MMC=y > >>> +CONFIG_CMD_SF=y > >>> +CONFIG_CMD_SF_TEST=y > >>> +CONFIG_CMD_SPI=y > >>> +CONFIG_CMD_USB=y > >>> +# CONFIG_CMD_SETEXPR is not set > >>> +CONFIG_CMD_CACHE=y > >>> +CONFIG_CMD_TIME=y > >>> +CONFIG_CMD_PMIC=y > >>> +CONFIG_CMD_REGULATOR=y > >>> +# CONFIG_SPL_DOS_PARTITION is not set > >>> +# CONFIG_SPL_EFI_PARTITION is not set > >>> +CONFIG_SPL_PARTITION_UUIDS=y > >>> +CONFIG_SPL_OF_CONTROL=y > >>> +CONFIG_OF_SPL_REMOVE_PROPS="pinctrl-0 pinctrl-names clock-names interrupt-parent assigned-clocks assigned-clock-rates assigned-clock-parents" > >>> +CONFIG_SPL_OF_PLATDATA=y > >>> +CONFIG_REGMAP=y > >>> +CONFIG_SPL_REGMAP=y > >>> +CONFIG_SYSCON=y > >>> +CONFIG_SPL_SYSCON=y > >>> +# CONFIG_SPL_SIMPLE_BUS is not set > >>> +CONFIG_CLK=y > >>> +CONFIG_SPL_CLK=y > >>> +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_GPIO=y > >>> +CONFIG_I2C_CROS_EC_TUNNEL=y > >>> +CONFIG_SYS_I2C_ROCKCHIP=y > >>> +CONFIG_I2C_MUX=y > >>> +CONFIG_DM_KEYBOARD=y > >>> +CONFIG_CROS_EC_KEYB=y > >>> +CONFIG_CROS_EC=y > >>> +CONFIG_CROS_EC_SPI=y > >>> +CONFIG_PWRSEQ=y > >>> +CONFIG_MMC_DW=y > >>> +CONFIG_MMC_DW_ROCKCHIP=y > >>> +CONFIG_PINCTRL=y > >>> +CONFIG_SPL_PINCTRL=y > >>> +# CONFIG_SPL_PINCTRL_FULL is not set > >>> +CONFIG_PINCTRL_ROCKCHIP_RK3288=y > >>> +CONFIG_DM_PMIC=y > >>> +# CONFIG_SPL_PMIC_CHILDREN is not set > >>> +CONFIG_PMIC_RK8XX=y > >>> +CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_FIXED=y > >>> +CONFIG_REGULATOR_RK8XX=y > >>> +CONFIG_PWM_ROCKCHIP=y > >>> +CONFIG_RAM=y > >>> +CONFIG_SPL_RAM=y > >>> +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_BASE=0xff690000 > >>> +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_CLOCK=24000000 > >>> +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_SHIFT=2 > >>> +CONFIG_SYS_NS16550=y > >>> +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SERIAL=y > >>> +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SPI=y > >>> +CONFIG_SYSRESET=y > >>> +CONFIG_USB=y > >>> +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_USB2_PHY=y > >>> +CONFIG_USB_STORAGE=y > >>> +CONFIG_USB_GADGET=y > >>> +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_MANUFACTURER="Rockchip" > >>> +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_VENDOR_NUM=0x2207 > >>> +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_PRODUCT_NUM=0x320a > >>> +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_DWC2_OTG=y > >>> +CONFIG_USB_FUNCTION_MASS_STORAGE=y > >>> +CONFIG_DM_VIDEO=y > >>> +CONFIG_DISPLAY=y > >>> +CONFIG_VIDEO_ROCKCHIP=y > >>> +CONFIG_DISPLAY_ROCKCHIP_EDP=y > >>> +CONFIG_DISPLAY_ROCKCHIP_HDMI=y > >>> +CONFIG_USE_TINY_PRINTF=y > >>> +CONFIG_CMD_DHRYSTONE=y > >>> +CONFIG_ERRNO_STR=y > >>> +# CONFIG_SPL_OF_LIBFDT is not set > >>> -- > >>> 2.17.0 > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> U-Boot mailing list > >>> U-Boot at lists.denx.de > >>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > U-Boot mailing list > > U-Boot at lists.denx.de > > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] rockchip: add support for veyron-speedy (ASUS Chromebook C201) 2018-07-24 5:12 ` Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-07-24 8:05 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-07-24 8:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot > On 24 Jul 2018, at 07:12, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 12:31:49PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >> >>> On 7 May 2018, at 02:20, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 12:12:54AM +0200, klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com <mailto:klaus.goger@theobroma-systems.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 06.05.2018, at 16:25, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> This adds support for the ASUS C201, a RK3288-based clamshell >>>>> device. The device tree comes from linus's linux tree at >>>>> 87ef12027b9b1dd0e0b12cf311fbcb19f9d92539. The SDRAM parameters >>>>> are for 4GB Samsung LPDDR3, decoded from coreboot's >>>>> src/mainboard/google/veyron/sdram_inf/sdram-lpddr3-samsung-4GB.inc >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> arch/arm/dts/Makefile | 1 + >>>>> arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts | 189 ++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c | 3 +- >>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig | 11 ++ >>>>> board/google/veyron/Kconfig | 16 ++ >>>>> configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig | 96 +++++++++++ >>>>> 6 files changed, 315 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>> create mode 100644 arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts >>>>> create mode 100644 configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile >>>>> index ac7667b1e8..ee04d9bedd 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile >>>>> @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP) += \ >>>>> rk3288-veyron-jerry.dtb \ >>>>> rk3288-veyron-mickey.dtb \ >>>>> rk3288-veyron-minnie.dtb \ >>>>> + rk3288-veyron-speedy.dtb \ >>>>> rk3288-vyasa.dtb \ >>>>> rk3328-evb.dtb \ >>>>> rk3368-lion.dtb \ >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts >>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>> index 0000000000..d5383cef0d >>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts >>>> >>>> This file looks quite different then the one I see on kernel.org with that revision id. So you are sure you >>>> imported that one? >>> Dafuq... it seems I borked something up in doing the patch juggling to >>> turn my single-commit mess of a patch (you know, the 'get the thing to >>> work branch') into a good patch series I messed up on this one. >>>> >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,189 @@ >>>>> +/* >>>>> + * Google Veyron Speedy Rev 1+ board device tree source >>>>> + * >>>>> + * Copyright 2015 Google, Inc >>>>> + * >>>>> + * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 >>>> >>>> This file is dual licensed upstream, keep it that way. >>>> The comment will claim it's a X11 license but the license text below >>>> is actually MIT so you may want to use the MIT SPDX tag for that. >>>> >>> Yeah, I was listening in on the convo on irc. So, even though it 'says' >>> its GPL/X11, the actual license text is MIT, so I should use that tag? >>> Its not my code, obviously, so I have no dog in that race anyways. >>>>> + */ >>>>> + >>>>> +/dts-v1/; >>>>> +#include "rk3288-veyron-chromebook.dtsi" >>>>> +#include "cros-ec-sbs.dtsi" >>>>> + >>>>> +/ { >>>>> + model = "Google Speedy"; >>>>> + compatible = "google,veyron-speedy-rev9", "google,veyron-speedy-rev8", >>>>> + "google,veyron-speedy-rev7", "google,veyron-speedy-rev6", >>>>> + "google,veyron-speedy-rev5", "google,veyron-speedy-rev4", >>>>> + "google,veyron-speedy-rev3", "google,veyron-speedy-rev2", >>>>> + "google,veyron-speedy", "google,veyron", "rockchip,rk3288"; >>>>> + >>>>> + chosen { >>>>> + stdout-path = &uart2; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + >>>>> + panel_regulator: panel-regulator { >>>>> + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; >>>>> + enable-active-high; >>>>> + gpio = <&gpio7 RK_PB6 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; >>>>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>>>> + pinctrl-0 = <&lcd_enable_h>; >>>>> + regulator-name = "panel_regulator"; >>>>> + startup-delay-us = <100000>; >>>>> + vin-supply = <&vcc33_sys>; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + >>>>> + vcc18_lcd: vcc18-lcd { >>>>> + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; >>>>> + enable-active-high; >>>>> + gpio = <&gpio2 RK_PB5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; >>>>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>>>> + pinctrl-0 = <&avdd_1v8_disp_en>; >>>>> + regulator-name = "vcc18_lcd"; >>>>> + regulator-always-on; >>>>> + regulator-boot-on; >>>>> + vin-supply = <&vcc18_wl>; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + >>>>> + backlight_regulator: backlight-regulator { >>>>> + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; >>>>> + enable-active-high; >>>>> + gpio = <&gpio2 RK_PB4 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; >>>>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>>>> + pinctrl-0 = <&bl_pwr_en>; >>>>> + regulator-name = "backlight_regulator"; >>>>> + vin-supply = <&vcc33_sys>; >>>>> + startup-delay-us = <15000>; >>>>> + }; >>>>> +}; >>>>> + >>>>> +&dmc { >>>>> + rockchip,pctl-timing = <0x215 0xc8 0x0 0x35 0x26 0x2 0x70 0x2000d >>>>> + 0x6 0x0 0x8 0x4 0x17 0x24 0xd 0x6 >>>>> + 0x4 0x8 0x4 0x76 0x4 0x0 0x30 0x0 >>>>> + 0x1 0x2 0x2 0x4 0x0 0x0 0xc0 0x4 >>>>> + 0x8 0x1f4>; >>>>> + rockchip,phy-timing = <0x48d7dd93 0x187008d8 0x121076 >>>>> + 0x0 0xc3 0x6 0x1>; >>>>> + rockchip,sdram-params = <0x20D266A4 0x5B6 6 533000000 6 13 0>; >>>>> +}; >>>> >>>> Not sure if this should go into a separate dtsi. One of the maintainer will have >>>> a preferred way I think, so lets see what they will add. >>>> >>> Yeah, that is possible. However, here I just followed the example of >>> rk3288-veyron-jerry.dtsi, which I (perhaps wrongly) assume can come in >>> other memory size variants. >> >> Having a “-u-boot.dtsi” is the current practice (counting 85 such files as of today). >> We should follow this model here as well for any new devices we add. >> > Fair. So what should go into the -u-boot.dtsi file? everything not > standard to the imported dts/dtsi from linux? Yes. Example will include: - any ‘prereloc’ tagging - initialisation parameters for the DMC if they are used by SPL only (and are thus absent from the Linux dts) — I don’t know what the situation on the r3288 platform is for this in Linux >>>>> +&gpio_keys { >>>>> + power { >>>>> + gpios = <&gpio0 RK_PA5 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; >>>>> + }; >>>>> +}; >>>>> + >>>>> +&backlight { >>>>> + power-supply = <&backlight_regulator>; >>>>> +}; >>>>> + >>>>> +&panel { >>>>> + power-supply = <&panel_regulator>; >>>>> +}; >>>>> + >>>>> +&rk808 { >>>>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>>>> + pinctrl-0 = <&pmic_int_l>; >>>>> +}; >>>>> + >>>>> +&sdmmc { >>>>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>>>> + pinctrl-0 = <&sdmmc_clk &sdmmc_cmd &sdmmc_cd_disabled &sdmmc_cd_gpio >>>>> + &sdmmc_bus4>; >>>>> + disable-wp; >>>>> +}; >>>>> + >>>>> +&vcc_5v { >>>>> + enable-active-high; >>>>> + gpio = <&gpio7 RK_PC5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; >>>>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>>>> + pinctrl-0 = <&drv_5v>; >>>>> +}; >>>>> + >>>>> +&vcc50_hdmi { >>>>> + enable-active-high; >>>>> + gpio = <&gpio5 RK_PC3 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; >>>>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>>>> + pinctrl-0 = <&vcc50_hdmi_en>; >>>>> +}; >>>>> + >>>>> +&edp { >>>>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>>>> + pinctrl-0 = <&edp_hpd>; >>>>> +}; >>>>> + >>>>> +&pinctrl { >>>>> + backlight { >>>>> + bl_pwr_en: bl_pwr_en { >>>>> + rockchip,pins = <2 12 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + >>>>> + buck-5v { >>>>> + drv_5v: drv-5v { >>>>> + rockchip,pins = <7 21 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + >>>>> + edp { >>>>> + edp_hpd: edp_hpd { >>>>> + rockchip,pins = <7 11 RK_FUNC_2 &pcfg_pull_down>; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + >>>>> + emmc { >>>>> + /* Make sure eMMC is not in reset */ >>>>> + emmc_deassert_reset: emmc-deassert-reset { >>>>> + rockchip,pins = <2 9 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + >>>>> + hdmi { >>>>> + vcc50_hdmi_en: vcc50-hdmi-en { >>>>> + rockchip,pins = <5 19 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + >>>>> + lcd { >>>>> + lcd_enable_h: lcd-en { >>>>> + rockchip,pins = <7 14 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + >>>>> + avdd_1v8_disp_en: avdd-1v8-disp-en { >>>>> + rockchip,pins = <2 13 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + >>>>> + pmic { >>>>> + dvs_1: dvs-1 { >>>>> + rockchip,pins = <7 12 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_down>; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + >>>>> + dvs_2: dvs-2 { >>>>> + rockchip,pins = <7 15 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_down>; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + }; >>>>> +}; >>>>> + >>>>> +&i2c4 { >>>>> + status = "okay"; >>>>> + >>>>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>>>> + pinctrl-0 = <&i2c4_xfer>; >>>>> + >>>>> + trackpad at 15 { >>>>> + compatible = "elan,i2c_touchpad"; >>>>> + interrupt-parent = <&gpio7>; >>>>> + interrupts = <3 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING>; >>>>> + /* >>>>> + * Remove the inherited pinctrl settings to avoid clashing >>>>> + * with bus-wide ones. >>>>> + */ >>>>> + /delete-property/pinctrl-names; >>>>> + /delete-property/pinctrl-0; >>>>> + reg = <0x15>; >>>>> + vcc-supply = <&vcc33_io>; >>>>> + wakeup-source; >>>>> + }; >>>>> +}; >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c >>>>> index f3ea624277..9ae4802647 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c >>>>> @@ -72,7 +72,8 @@ u32 spl_boot_device(void) >>>>> fallback: >>>>> #elif defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_JERRY) || \ >>>>> defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBIT_MICKEY) || \ >>>>> - defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE) >>>>> + defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE) || \ >>>>> + defined(CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY) >>>>> return BOOT_DEVICE_SPI; >>>>> #endif >>>>> return BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1; >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig >>>>> index 6beb26fd7a..8d1d37895d 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig >>>>> @@ -30,6 +30,17 @@ config TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_MINNIE >>>>> functions. It includes 2 or 4GB of SDRAM and 16 or 32GB of >>>>> internal MMC. The product name is ASUS Chromebook Flip. >>>>> >>>>> +config TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY >>>>> + bool "Google/Rockchip Veyron-Speedy Chromebook" >>>>> + select BOARD_LATE_INIT >>>>> + help >>>>> + Speedy is a RK3288-based clamshell device with 2 USB 2.0 ports, >>>>> + micro HDMI, an 11.6 inch display, micro-SD card, >>>>> + HD camera, touchpad, wifi and Bluetooth. It includes a Chrome OS >>>>> + EC (Cortex-M3) to provide access to the keyboard and battery >>>>> + functions. It includes 2 or 4GB of SDRAM and 16GB of internal MMC. >>>>> + The product name is Asus Chromebook C201PA. >>>>> + >>>>> config TARGET_EVB_RK3288 >>>>> bool "Evb-RK3288" >>>>> select BOARD_LATE_INIT >>>>> diff --git a/board/google/veyron/Kconfig b/board/google/veyron/Kconfig >>>>> index 770e9aad28..7f55d78dac 100644 >>>>> --- a/board/google/veyron/Kconfig >>>>> +++ b/board/google/veyron/Kconfig >>>>> @@ -45,3 +45,19 @@ config BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS # dummy >>>>> def_bool y >>>>> >>>>> endif >>>>> + >>>>> +if TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY >>>>> + >>>>> +config SYS_BOARD >>>>> + default "veyron" >>>>> + >>>>> +config SYS_VENDOR >>>>> + default "google" >>>>> + >>>>> +config SYS_CONFIG_NAME >>>>> + default "veyron" >>>>> + >>>>> +config BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS # dummy >>>>> + def_bool y >>>>> + >>>>> +endif >>>>> diff --git a/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig b/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig >>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>> index 0000000000..8789b56f37 >>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>> +++ b/configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,96 @@ >>>>> +CONFIG_ARM=y >>>>> +CONFIG_ARCH_ROCKCHIP=y >>>>> +CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE=0x00100000 >>>>> +CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_F_LEN=0x2000 >>>>> +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288=y >>>>> +# CONFIG_SPL_MMC_SUPPORT is not set >>>>> +CONFIG_TARGET_CHROMEBOOK_SPEEDY=y >>>>> +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_FLASH_SUPPORT=y >>>>> +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_SUPPORT=y >>>>> +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R_ADDR=0x80000 >>>>> +CONFIG_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE="rk3288-veyron-speedy" >>>>> +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART=y >>>>> +# CONFIG_ANDROID_BOOT_IMAGE is not set >>>>> +CONFIG_SILENT_CONSOLE=y >>>>> +# CONFIG_DISPLAY_CPUINFO is not set >>>>> +CONFIG_DISPLAY_BOARDINFO_LATE=y >>>>> +CONFIG_BOARD_EARLY_INIT_F=y >>>>> +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R=y >>>>> +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R_MALLOC_SIMPLE_LEN=0x2000 >>>>> +CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD=y >>>>> +CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH=y >>>>> +CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH_MMC_DEV=0 >>>>> +CONFIG_CMD_GPIO=y >>>>> +CONFIG_CMD_GPT=y >>>>> +CONFIG_CMD_I2C=y >>>>> +CONFIG_CMD_MMC=y >>>>> +CONFIG_CMD_SF=y >>>>> +CONFIG_CMD_SF_TEST=y >>>>> +CONFIG_CMD_SPI=y >>>>> +CONFIG_CMD_USB=y >>>>> +# CONFIG_CMD_SETEXPR is not set >>>>> +CONFIG_CMD_CACHE=y >>>>> +CONFIG_CMD_TIME=y >>>>> +CONFIG_CMD_PMIC=y >>>>> +CONFIG_CMD_REGULATOR=y >>>>> +# CONFIG_SPL_DOS_PARTITION is not set >>>>> +# CONFIG_SPL_EFI_PARTITION is not set >>>>> +CONFIG_SPL_PARTITION_UUIDS=y >>>>> +CONFIG_SPL_OF_CONTROL=y >>>>> +CONFIG_OF_SPL_REMOVE_PROPS="pinctrl-0 pinctrl-names clock-names interrupt-parent assigned-clocks assigned-clock-rates assigned-clock-parents" >>>>> +CONFIG_SPL_OF_PLATDATA=y >>>>> +CONFIG_REGMAP=y >>>>> +CONFIG_SPL_REGMAP=y >>>>> +CONFIG_SYSCON=y >>>>> +CONFIG_SPL_SYSCON=y >>>>> +# CONFIG_SPL_SIMPLE_BUS is not set >>>>> +CONFIG_CLK=y >>>>> +CONFIG_SPL_CLK=y >>>>> +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_GPIO=y >>>>> +CONFIG_I2C_CROS_EC_TUNNEL=y >>>>> +CONFIG_SYS_I2C_ROCKCHIP=y >>>>> +CONFIG_I2C_MUX=y >>>>> +CONFIG_DM_KEYBOARD=y >>>>> +CONFIG_CROS_EC_KEYB=y >>>>> +CONFIG_CROS_EC=y >>>>> +CONFIG_CROS_EC_SPI=y >>>>> +CONFIG_PWRSEQ=y >>>>> +CONFIG_MMC_DW=y >>>>> +CONFIG_MMC_DW_ROCKCHIP=y >>>>> +CONFIG_PINCTRL=y >>>>> +CONFIG_SPL_PINCTRL=y >>>>> +# CONFIG_SPL_PINCTRL_FULL is not set >>>>> +CONFIG_PINCTRL_ROCKCHIP_RK3288=y >>>>> +CONFIG_DM_PMIC=y >>>>> +# CONFIG_SPL_PMIC_CHILDREN is not set >>>>> +CONFIG_PMIC_RK8XX=y >>>>> +CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_FIXED=y >>>>> +CONFIG_REGULATOR_RK8XX=y >>>>> +CONFIG_PWM_ROCKCHIP=y >>>>> +CONFIG_RAM=y >>>>> +CONFIG_SPL_RAM=y >>>>> +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_BASE=0xff690000 >>>>> +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_CLOCK=24000000 >>>>> +CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_SHIFT=2 >>>>> +CONFIG_SYS_NS16550=y >>>>> +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SERIAL=y >>>>> +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SPI=y >>>>> +CONFIG_SYSRESET=y >>>>> +CONFIG_USB=y >>>>> +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_USB2_PHY=y >>>>> +CONFIG_USB_STORAGE=y >>>>> +CONFIG_USB_GADGET=y >>>>> +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_MANUFACTURER="Rockchip" >>>>> +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_VENDOR_NUM=0x2207 >>>>> +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_PRODUCT_NUM=0x320a >>>>> +CONFIG_USB_GADGET_DWC2_OTG=y >>>>> +CONFIG_USB_FUNCTION_MASS_STORAGE=y >>>>> +CONFIG_DM_VIDEO=y >>>>> +CONFIG_DISPLAY=y >>>>> +CONFIG_VIDEO_ROCKCHIP=y >>>>> +CONFIG_DISPLAY_ROCKCHIP_EDP=y >>>>> +CONFIG_DISPLAY_ROCKCHIP_HDMI=y >>>>> +CONFIG_USE_TINY_PRINTF=y >>>>> +CONFIG_CMD_DHRYSTONE=y >>>>> +CONFIG_ERRNO_STR=y >>>>> +# CONFIG_SPL_OF_LIBFDT is not set >>>>> -- >>>>> 2.17.0 >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> U-Boot mailing list >>>>> U-Boot at lists.denx.de >>>>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> U-Boot mailing list >>> U-Boot at lists.denx.de >>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-06 14:25 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 14:25 ` Marty E. Plummer -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 14:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot-0aAXYlwwYIKGBzrmiIFOJg Cc: vagrant-8fiUuRrzOP0dnm+yROfE0A, linux-rockchip-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r, Marty E. Plummer Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer-zVALfsKDk1AS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org> --- arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ #include <asm/io.h> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> +#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/sizes.h> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) size_t size_mb = 0; u32 ch; - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); + if (!size_mb) { - debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); - for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { - rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & - SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); - col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); - bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); - cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & - SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); - cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & - SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); - bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & - SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); - row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & - SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; + u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); + u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) + & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); - chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); + debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); + for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { + rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & + SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); + col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); + bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); + cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & + SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); + cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & + SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); + bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & + SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); + row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & + SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; - if (rank > 1) - chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); - if (row_3_4) - chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; - size_mb += chipsize_mb; - debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", - rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); + chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); + + if (rank > 1) + chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); + if (row_3_4) + chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; + size_mb += chipsize_mb; + debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", + rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); + } + + /* + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space + * so we reserve it + */ + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); } return (size_t)size_mb << 20; -- 2.17.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size @ 2018-05-06 14:25 ` Marty E. Plummer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 14:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> --- arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ #include <asm/io.h> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> +#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/sizes.h> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) size_t size_mb = 0; u32 ch; - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); + if (!size_mb) { - debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); - for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { - rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & - SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); - col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); - bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); - cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & - SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); - cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & - SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); - bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & - SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); - row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & - SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; + u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); + u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) + & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); - chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); + debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); + for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { + rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & + SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); + col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); + bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); + cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & + SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); + cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & + SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); + bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & + SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); + row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & + SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; - if (rank > 1) - chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); - if (row_3_4) - chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; - size_mb += chipsize_mb; - debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", - rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); + chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); + + if (rank > 1) + chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); + if (row_3_4) + chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; + size_mb += chipsize_mb; + debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", + rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); + } + + /* + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space + * so we reserve it + */ + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); } return (size_t)size_mb << 20; -- 2.17.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-06 14:25 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer (?) @ 2018-05-06 18:39 ` klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com 2018-05-06 19:08 ` Marty E. Plummer -1 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread From: klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com @ 2018-05-06 18:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot CC Philipp and Simon due maintainership (you may want to use get_maintainer.pl in the future) and Kever as the original author of the file. > On 06.05.2018, at 16:25, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c > > Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) > is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. > > Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > --- > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ > #include <asm/io.h> > #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> > #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> > +#include <linux/kernel.h> > +#include <linux/sizes.h> Is adding these headers really necessary? common.h already includes kernel.h and sizes.h (with some redirections of config.h) > DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > size_t size_mb = 0; > u32 ch; > > - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > + if (!size_mb) { Is this really required? I don’t see a way that size_mb will already be set at this point. But it blows up your diff that it takes quite a while to see that your only real change is the size_mb = min(...) part at the end. > - debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); > - for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { > - rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); > - col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); > - bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); > - cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); > - cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); > - bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & > - SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); > - row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > + u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > + u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > + & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > > - chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > + debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); > + for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { > + rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); > + col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); > + bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); > + cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); > + cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); > + bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & > + SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); > + row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > > - if (rank > 1) > - chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > - if (row_3_4) > - chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > - size_mb += chipsize_mb; > - debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > - rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > + chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > + > + if (rank > 1) > + chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > + if (row_3_4) > + chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > + size_mb += chipsize_mb; > + debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > + rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > + } > + > + /* > + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > + * so we reserve it > + */ That’s not true for all Rockchip SoCs. On the RK3399 for example the upper limit is 0xf8000000. Even on the RK3288 DRAM address range is actually 0x00000000-0xfe00000 > + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); > } Should be 0xfe000000 (4G-32MB) for RK3288. But there is already a define for that, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE is defined in rkxxx_common.h. Using that one would help to avoid possible breakage of other Rockchip SoCs. > return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > -- > 2.17.0 Regards, Klaus ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-06 18:39 ` klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com @ 2018-05-06 19:08 ` Marty E. Plummer 2018-05-06 20:03 ` Marty E. Plummer 0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 19:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 08:39:23PM +0200, klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com wrote: > CC Philipp and Simon due maintainership (you may want to use get_maintainer.pl in the future) > and Kever as the original author of the file. > > > On 06.05.2018, at 16:25, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > > > Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c > > > > Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) > > is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. > > > > Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > > --- > > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- > > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ > > #include <asm/io.h> > > #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> > > #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> > > +#include <linux/kernel.h> > > +#include <linux/sizes.h> > > Is adding these headers really necessary? > common.h already includes kernel.h and sizes.h (with some redirections of config.h) > If it it does get that in eventually, I suppose its not required. I didn't know that chain of inclusion existed, so I grabbed what I needed. > > DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > > size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > > @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > > size_t size_mb = 0; > > u32 ch; > > > > - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > > - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > > - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > > + if (!size_mb) { > > Is this really required? I don't see a way that size_mb will already be set at this point. > But it blows up your diff that it takes quite a while to see that your only real change is > the size_mb = min(...) part at the end. > It may be unneeded. I just knew that ram init worked on coreboot and not on u-boot, and the only difference between the codepaths on both was the if and min() > > - debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); > > - for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { > > - rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & > > - SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); > > - col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); > > - bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); > > - cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > > - SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); > > - cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > > - SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); > > - bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & > > - SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); > > - row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & > > - SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > > + u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > > + u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > > + & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > > > > - chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > > + debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); > > + for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { > > + rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & > > + SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); > > + col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); > > + bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); > > + cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > > + SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); > > + cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > > + SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); > > + bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & > > + SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); > > + row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & > > + SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > > > > - if (rank > 1) > > - chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > > - if (row_3_4) > > - chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > > - size_mb += chipsize_mb; > > - debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > > - rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > > + chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > > + > > + if (rank > 1) > > + chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > > + if (row_3_4) > > + chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > > + size_mb += chipsize_mb; > > + debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > > + rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > > + } > > + > > + /* > > + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > > + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > > + * so we reserve it > > + */ > > That's not true for all Rockchip SoCs. On the RK3399 for example the upper limit > is 0xf8000000. Even on the RK3288 DRAM address range is actually > 0x00000000-0xfe00000 > > > + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); > > } > > Should be 0xfe000000 (4G-32MB) for RK3288. > But there is already a define for that, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE is defined in > rkxxx_common.h. Using that one would help to avoid possible breakage > of other Rockchip SoCs. > Oh, does that get #defined properly for each SoC? if so, I'll sub that in for better compat. > > return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > > -- > > 2.17.0 > > Regards, > Klaus > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-06 19:08 ` Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 20:03 ` Marty E. Plummer 2018-05-06 20:21 ` klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com 0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 20:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 02:08:25PM -0500, Marty E. Plummer wrote: > > On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 08:39:23PM +0200, klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com wrote: > > > On 06.05.2018, at 16:25, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > > + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > > > + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > > > + * so we reserve it > > > + */ > > > > That's not true for all Rockchip SoCs. On the RK3399 for example the upper limit > > is 0xf8000000. Even on the RK3288 DRAM address range is actually > > 0x00000000-0xfe00000 > > > > > + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); > > > } > > > > Should be 0xfe000000 (4G-32MB) for RK3288. > > But there is already a define for that, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE is defined in > > rkxxx_common.h. Using that one would help to avoid possible breakage > > of other Rockchip SoCs. > > > Oh, does that get #defined properly for each SoC? if so, I'll sub that > in for better compat. In fact, could you or someone else help me to understand the #include chain here? I'm not certain as to what that is available in each header mentioned can be used in this file to get max compat across the rockchip lineup, and I don't want to break someone elses board/etc with something that 'works for me'. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-06 20:03 ` Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 20:21 ` klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com 2018-05-06 20:41 ` Marty E. Plummer 0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread From: klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com @ 2018-05-06 20:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot > On 06.05.2018, at 22:03, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 02:08:25PM -0500, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>> On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 08:39:23PM +0200, klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com wrote: >>>> On 06.05.2018, at 16:25, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>>> + * so we reserve it >>>> + */ >>> >>> That's not true for all Rockchip SoCs. On the RK3399 for example the upper limit >>> is 0xf8000000. Even on the RK3288 DRAM address range is actually >>> 0x00000000-0xfe00000 >>> >>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >>>> } >>> >>> Should be 0xfe000000 (4G-32MB) for RK3288. >>> But there is already a define for that, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE is defined in >>> rkxxx_common.h. Using that one would help to avoid possible breakage >>> of other Rockchip SoCs. >>> >> Oh, does that get #defined properly for each SoC? if so, I'll sub that >> in for better compat. > In fact, could you or someone else help me to understand the #include > chain here? I'm not certain as to what that is available in each header > mentioned can be used in this file to get max compat across the rockchip > lineup, and I don't want to break someone elses board/etc with something > that 'works for me’. You can get a full list of included headers by adding the -H file to the gcc command line. make V=1 will help you to see how it’s called on your system. In that particular case the relevant include chain is: . include/common.h .. include/config.h ... include/configs/popmetal_rk3288.h .... include/configs/rk3288_common.h So the correct rk3xxx_common.h will be selected by config.h and SDRAM_MAX_SIZE is defined in all of them. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-06 20:21 ` klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com @ 2018-05-06 20:41 ` Marty E. Plummer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 20:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 10:21:55PM +0200, klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com wrote: > > > On 06.05.2018, at 22:03, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 02:08:25PM -0500, Marty E. Plummer wrote: > >>> On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 08:39:23PM +0200, klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com wrote: > >>>> On 06.05.2018, at 16:25, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > >>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > >>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > >>>> + * so we reserve it > >>>> + */ > >>> > >>> That's not true for all Rockchip SoCs. On the RK3399 for example the upper limit > >>> is 0xf8000000. Even on the RK3288 DRAM address range is actually > >>> 0x00000000-0xfe00000 > >>> > >>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); > >>>> } > >>> > >>> Should be 0xfe000000 (4G-32MB) for RK3288. > >>> But there is already a define for that, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE is defined in > >>> rkxxx_common.h. Using that one would help to avoid possible breakage > >>> of other Rockchip SoCs. > >>> > >> Oh, does that get #defined properly for each SoC? if so, I'll sub that > >> in for better compat. > > In fact, could you or someone else help me to understand the #include > > chain here? I'm not certain as to what that is available in each header > > mentioned can be used in this file to get max compat across the rockchip > > lineup, and I don't want to break someone elses board/etc with something > > that 'works for me'. > > You can get a full list of included headers by adding the -H file to the gcc command line. > make V=1 will help you to see how it's called on your system. > > In that particular case the relevant include chain is: > . include/common.h > .. include/config.h > ... include/configs/popmetal_rk3288.h > .... include/configs/rk3288_common.h > > So the correct rk3xxx_common.h will be selected by config.h and SDRAM_MAX_SIZE > is defined in all of them. > Ah, so 's:0xff000000:SDRAM_MAX_SIZE:' in that spot and it should be golden for all the rockchip stuffs. I'll try that, then try without the if (!size_mb) guard as well. Should it still work after that, I'll resubmit that patch. Probably with patman, if I can grok how to use it. Aside from these issues, does the rest of the series look fine? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-06 14:25 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-06 22:19 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-06 22:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marty E. Plummer; +Cc: vagrant, u-boot, linux-rockchip > On 6 May 2018, at 16:25, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c > > Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) > is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. Could you elaborate what the change is and what root-cause this addresses (4GB reporting as 0 sounds a bit like a 32bit type overflowing)? It’s really hard to tell from the patch below (which seems to have everything simply reformatted to a different indentation)... > > Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > --- > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ > #include <asm/io.h> > #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> > #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> > +#include <linux/kernel.h> > +#include <linux/sizes.h> > > DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > size_t size_mb = 0; > u32 ch; > > - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > + if (!size_mb) { Given that there’s a “size_mb = 0” just above it, this will always evaluate to true… > > - debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); > - for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { > - rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); > - col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); > - bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); > - cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); > - cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); > - bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & > - SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); > - row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > + u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > + u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > + & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > > - chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > + debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); > + for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { > + rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); > + col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); > + bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); > + cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); > + cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); > + bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & > + SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); > + row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > > - if (rank > 1) > - chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > - if (row_3_4) > - chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > - size_mb += chipsize_mb; > - debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > - rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > + chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > + > + if (rank > 1) > + chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > + if (row_3_4) > + chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > + size_mb += chipsize_mb; > + debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > + rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > + } > + > + /* > + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > + * so we reserve it > + */ > + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); > } > > return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > -- > 2.17.0 > > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot@lists.denx.de > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size @ 2018-05-06 22:19 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-06 22:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot > On 6 May 2018, at 16:25, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c > > Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) > is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. Could you elaborate what the change is and what root-cause this addresses (4GB reporting as 0 sounds a bit like a 32bit type overflowing)? It’s really hard to tell from the patch below (which seems to have everything simply reformatted to a different indentation)... > > Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > --- > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ > #include <asm/io.h> > #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> > #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> > +#include <linux/kernel.h> > +#include <linux/sizes.h> > > DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > size_t size_mb = 0; > u32 ch; > > - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > + if (!size_mb) { Given that there’s a “size_mb = 0” just above it, this will always evaluate to true… > > - debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); > - for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { > - rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); > - col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); > - bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); > - cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); > - cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); > - bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & > - SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); > - row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > + u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > + u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > + & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > > - chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > + debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); > + for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { > + rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); > + col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); > + bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); > + cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); > + cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); > + bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & > + SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); > + row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > > - if (rank > 1) > - chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > - if (row_3_4) > - chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > - size_mb += chipsize_mb; > - debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > - rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > + chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > + > + if (rank > 1) > + chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > + if (row_3_4) > + chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > + size_mb += chipsize_mb; > + debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > + rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > + } > + > + /* > + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > + * so we reserve it > + */ > + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); > } > > return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > -- > 2.17.0 > > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot at lists.denx.de > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-06 22:19 ` [U-Boot] " Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-07 0:25 ` Marty E. Plummer -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-07 0:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dr. Philipp Tomsich; +Cc: vagrant, u-boot, linux-rockchip On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 12:19:11AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > > > On 6 May 2018, at 16:25, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > > > Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c > > > > Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) > > is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. > > Could you elaborate what the change is and what root-cause this addresses (4GB > reporting as 0 sounds a bit like a 32bit type overflowing)? > It's really hard to tell from the patch below (which seems to have everything simply > reformatted to a different indentation)... > if (!size_mb) {} wrapping, plus the min code near the end. However, actual testing on hardware shows this if guard to be unneeded, so I'll be dropping it. I was just taking what was different from coreboot's implementation (which I knew to work), but not all was needed it seems. > > > > Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > > --- > > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- > > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ > > #include <asm/io.h> > > #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> > > #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> > > +#include <linux/kernel.h> > > +#include <linux/sizes.h> > > > > DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > > size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > > @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > > size_t size_mb = 0; > > u32 ch; > > > > - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > > - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > > - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > > + if (!size_mb) { > > Given that there's a "size_mb = 0" just above it, this will always evaluate > to true... > Very true, next patch revision will do away with this if guard, as its unneeded according to hardware retesting. > > > > - debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); > > - for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { > > - rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & > > - SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); > > - col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); > > - bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); > > - cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > > - SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); > > - cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > > - SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); > > - bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & > > - SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); > > - row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & > > - SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > > + u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > > + u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > > + & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > > > > - chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > > + debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); > > + for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { > > + rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & > > + SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); > > + col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); > > + bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); > > + cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > > + SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); > > + cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > > + SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); > > + bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & > > + SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); > > + row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & > > + SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > > > > - if (rank > 1) > > - chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > > - if (row_3_4) > > - chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > > - size_mb += chipsize_mb; > > - debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > > - rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > > + chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > > + > > + if (rank > 1) > > + chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > > + if (row_3_4) > > + chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > > + size_mb += chipsize_mb; > > + debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > > + rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > > + } > > + > > + /* > > + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > > + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > > + * so we reserve it > > + */ > > + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); > > } > > > > return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > > -- > > 2.17.0 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > U-Boot mailing list > > U-Boot@lists.denx.de > > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot > _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size @ 2018-05-07 0:25 ` Marty E. Plummer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-07 0:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 12:19:11AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > > > On 6 May 2018, at 16:25, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > > > Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c > > > > Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) > > is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. > > Could you elaborate what the change is and what root-cause this addresses (4GB > reporting as 0 sounds a bit like a 32bit type overflowing)? > It's really hard to tell from the patch below (which seems to have everything simply > reformatted to a different indentation)... > if (!size_mb) {} wrapping, plus the min code near the end. However, actual testing on hardware shows this if guard to be unneeded, so I'll be dropping it. I was just taking what was different from coreboot's implementation (which I knew to work), but not all was needed it seems. > > > > Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > > --- > > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- > > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ > > #include <asm/io.h> > > #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> > > #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> > > +#include <linux/kernel.h> > > +#include <linux/sizes.h> > > > > DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > > size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > > @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > > size_t size_mb = 0; > > u32 ch; > > > > - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > > - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > > - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > > + if (!size_mb) { > > Given that there's a "size_mb = 0" just above it, this will always evaluate > to true... > Very true, next patch revision will do away with this if guard, as its unneeded according to hardware retesting. > > > > - debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); > > - for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { > > - rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & > > - SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); > > - col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); > > - bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); > > - cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > > - SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); > > - cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > > - SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); > > - bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & > > - SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); > > - row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & > > - SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > > + u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > > + u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > > + & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > > > > - chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > > + debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); > > + for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { > > + rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & > > + SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); > > + col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); > > + bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); > > + cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > > + SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); > > + cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > > + SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); > > + bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & > > + SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); > > + row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & > > + SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > > > > - if (rank > 1) > > - chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > > - if (row_3_4) > > - chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > > - size_mb += chipsize_mb; > > - debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > > - rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > > + chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > > + > > + if (rank > 1) > > + chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > > + if (row_3_4) > > + chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > > + size_mb += chipsize_mb; > > + debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > > + rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > > + } > > + > > + /* > > + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > > + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > > + * so we reserve it > > + */ > > + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); > > } > > > > return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > > -- > > 2.17.0 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > U-Boot mailing list > > U-Boot at lists.denx.de > > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-06 14:25 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-07 2:20 ` Kever Yang -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Kever Yang @ 2018-05-07 2:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marty E. Plummer, u-boot; +Cc: vagrant, linux-rockchip Hi Marty, On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: > Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c > > Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) > is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. > > Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > --- > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ > #include <asm/io.h> > #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> > #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> > +#include <linux/kernel.h> > +#include <linux/sizes.h> > > DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > size_t size_mb = 0; > u32 ch; > > - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > + if (!size_mb) { I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, isn't it? > > - debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); > - for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { > - rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); > - col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); > - bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); > - cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); > - cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); > - bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & > - SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); > - row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > + u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > + u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > + & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > > - chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > + debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); > + for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { > + rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); > + col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); > + bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); > + cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); > + cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); > + bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & > + SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); > + row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > > - if (rank > 1) > - chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > - if (row_3_4) > - chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > - size_mb += chipsize_mb; > - debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > - rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > + chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > + > + if (rank > 1) > + chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > + if (row_3_4) > + chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > + size_mb += chipsize_mb; > + debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > + rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > + } > + I think don't need the changes before here. > + /* > + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > + * so we reserve it > + */ > + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use SDRAM_MAX_SIZE instead of hard code. Thanks, - Kever > } > > return (size_t)size_mb << 20; _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size @ 2018-05-07 2:20 ` Kever Yang 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Kever Yang @ 2018-05-07 2:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Marty, On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: > Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c > > Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) > is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. > > Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > --- > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ > #include <asm/io.h> > #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> > #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> > +#include <linux/kernel.h> > +#include <linux/sizes.h> > > DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > size_t size_mb = 0; > u32 ch; > > - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > + if (!size_mb) { I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, isn't it? > > - debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); > - for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { > - rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); > - col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); > - bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); > - cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); > - cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); > - bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & > - SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); > - row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & > - SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > + u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > + u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > + & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > > - chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > + debug("%s %x %x\n", __func__, (u32)reg, sys_reg); > + for (ch = 0; ch < ch_num; ch++) { > + rank = 1 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_RANK_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_RANK_MASK); > + col = 9 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_COL_SHIFT(ch) & SYS_REG_COL_MASK); > + bk = 3 - ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BK_SHIFT(ch)) & SYS_REG_BK_MASK); > + cs0_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_CS0_ROW_MASK); > + cs1_row = 13 + (sys_reg >> SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_CS1_ROW_MASK); > + bw = (2 >> ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_BW_SHIFT(ch)) & > + SYS_REG_BW_MASK)); > + row_3_4 = sys_reg >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_SHIFT(ch) & > + SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > > - if (rank > 1) > - chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > - if (row_3_4) > - chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > - size_mb += chipsize_mb; > - debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > - rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > + chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > + > + if (rank > 1) > + chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > + if (row_3_4) > + chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > + size_mb += chipsize_mb; > + debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > + rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > + } > + I think don't need the changes before here. > + /* > + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > + * so we reserve it > + */ > + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use SDRAM_MAX_SIZE instead of hard code. Thanks, - Kever > } > > return (size_t)size_mb << 20; ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-07 2:20 ` [U-Boot] " Kever Yang @ 2018-05-07 2:34 ` Marty E. Plummer -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-07 2:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kever Yang; +Cc: vagrant, u-boot, linux-rockchip On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: > Hi Marty, > > > On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: > > Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c > > > > Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) > > is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. > > I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. > The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before > the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. > > > > > Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > > --- > > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- > > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ > > #include <asm/io.h> > > #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> > > #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> > > +#include <linux/kernel.h> > > +#include <linux/sizes.h> > > > > DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > > size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > > @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > > size_t size_mb = 0; > > u32 ch; > > > > - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > > - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > > - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > > + if (!size_mb) { > > I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, > isn't it? > I think don't need the changes before here. Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. > > + /* > > + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > > + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > > + * so we reserve it > > + */ > > + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); > > This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use > SDRAM_MAX_SIZE > instead of hard code. Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, build and boot tested on my hardware. > > Thanks, > - Kever > > } > > > > return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > > _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size @ 2018-05-07 2:34 ` Marty E. Plummer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-07 2:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: > Hi Marty, > > > On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: > > Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c > > > > Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) > > is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. > > I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. > The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before > the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. > > > > > Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > > --- > > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- > > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ > > #include <asm/io.h> > > #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> > > #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> > > +#include <linux/kernel.h> > > +#include <linux/sizes.h> > > > > DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > > size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > > @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > > size_t size_mb = 0; > > u32 ch; > > > > - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > > - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > > - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > > + if (!size_mb) { > > I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, > isn't it? > I think don't need the changes before here. Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. > > + /* > > + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > > + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > > + * so we reserve it > > + */ > > + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); > > This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use > SDRAM_MAX_SIZE > instead of hard code. Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, build and boot tested on my hardware. > > Thanks, > - Kever > > } > > > > return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-07 2:34 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-07 9:16 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-07 9:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marty E. Plummer; +Cc: vagrant, u-boot, linux-rockchip > On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >> Hi Marty, >> >> >> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c >>> >>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) >>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. >> >> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. >> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before >> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. >> >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>> --- >>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- >>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >>> #include <asm/io.h> >>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> >>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> >>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> >>> >>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>> size_t size_mb = 0; >>> u32 ch; >>> >>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); >>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) >>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); >>> + if (!size_mb) { >> >> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, >> isn't it? >> I think don't need the changes before here. > Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) > guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out > that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. >>> + /* >>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>> + * so we reserve it >>> + */ >>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >> >> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use >> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE >> instead of hard code. > Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, > build and boot tested on my hardware. In that case you just masked the problem but didn’t solve it: assuming size_mb is size_t (I’ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out…). >> >> Thanks, >> - Kever >>> } >>> >>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >> >> > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot@lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size @ 2018-05-07 9:16 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-07 9:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot > On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >> Hi Marty, >> >> >> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c >>> >>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) >>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. >> >> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. >> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before >> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. >> >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>> --- >>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- >>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >>> #include <asm/io.h> >>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> >>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> >>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> >>> >>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>> size_t size_mb = 0; >>> u32 ch; >>> >>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); >>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) >>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); >>> + if (!size_mb) { >> >> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, >> isn't it? >> I think don't need the changes before here. > Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) > guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out > that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. >>> + /* >>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>> + * so we reserve it >>> + */ >>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >> >> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use >> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE >> instead of hard code. > Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, > build and boot tested on my hardware. In that case you just masked the problem but didn’t solve it: assuming size_mb is size_t (I’ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out…). >> >> Thanks, >> - Kever >>> } >>> >>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >> >> > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot at lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <791299C0-EEC0-4DB1-97C4-A8DAD3B1A481-SN7IsUiht6C/RdPyistoZJqQE7yCjDx5@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-07 9:16 ` [U-Boot] " Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-08 0:52 ` Marty E. Plummer -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-08 0:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dr. Philipp Tomsich Cc: vagrant-8fiUuRrzOP0dnm+yROfE0A, u-boot-0aAXYlwwYIKGBzrmiIFOJg, Kever Yang, linux-rockchip-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > > > On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer-zVALfsKDk1AS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: > >> Hi Marty, > >> > >> > >> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: > >>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c > >>> > >>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) > >>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. > >> > >> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. > >> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before > >> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. > >> > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer-zVALfsKDk1AS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org> > >>> --- > >>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- > >>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 > >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ > >>> #include <asm/io.h> > >>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> > >>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> > >>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> > >>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> > >>> > >>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > >>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > >>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > >>> size_t size_mb = 0; > >>> u32 ch; > >>> > >>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > >>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > >>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > >>> + if (!size_mb) { > >> > >> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, > >> isn't it? > >> I think don't need the changes before here. > > Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) > > guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out > > that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. > >>> + /* > >>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > >>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > >>> + * so we reserve it > >>> + */ > >>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); > >> > >> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use > >> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE > >> instead of hard code. > > Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, > > build and boot tested on my hardware. > > In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb > is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) > which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. > > In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what > happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). > A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ */ +#define DEBUG 1 #include <common.h> #include <dm.h> #include <ram.h> @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); if (rank > 1) chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); if (row_3_4) chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; size_mb += chipsize_mb; + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); } + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); return (size_t)size_mb << 20; diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ * Adapted from coreboot. */ +#define DEBUG 1 #include <common.h> #include <clk.h> #include <dm.h> --- U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) Trying to boot from SPI U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) Model: Google Speedy DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 4 GiB MMC: dwmmc@ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc@ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc@ff0f0000: 0 In: cros-ec-keyb Out: vidconsole Err: vidconsole Model: Google Speedy rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! Net: Net Initialization Skipped No ethernet found. Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info size member to a 64-bit container? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> - Kever > >>> } > >>> > >>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > U-Boot mailing list > > U-Boot-0aAXYlwwYIKGBzrmiIFOJg@public.gmane.org <mailto:U-Boot-0aAXYlwwYIKGBzrmiIFOJg@public.gmane.org> > > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size @ 2018-05-08 0:52 ` Marty E. Plummer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-08 0:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > > > On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: > >> Hi Marty, > >> > >> > >> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: > >>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c > >>> > >>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) > >>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. > >> > >> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. > >> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before > >> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. > >> > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > >>> --- > >>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- > >>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 > >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ > >>> #include <asm/io.h> > >>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> > >>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> > >>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> > >>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> > >>> > >>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > >>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > >>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > >>> size_t size_mb = 0; > >>> u32 ch; > >>> > >>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > >>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > >>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > >>> + if (!size_mb) { > >> > >> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, > >> isn't it? > >> I think don't need the changes before here. > > Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) > > guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out > > that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. > >>> + /* > >>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > >>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > >>> + * so we reserve it > >>> + */ > >>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); > >> > >> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use > >> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE > >> instead of hard code. > > Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, > > build and boot tested on my hardware. > > In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb > is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) > which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. > > In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what > happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). > A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ */ +#define DEBUG 1 #include <common.h> #include <dm.h> #include <ram.h> @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); if (rank > 1) chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); if (row_3_4) chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; size_mb += chipsize_mb; + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); } + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); return (size_t)size_mb << 20; diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ * Adapted from coreboot. */ +#define DEBUG 1 #include <common.h> #include <clk.h> #include <dm.h> --- U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) Trying to boot from SPI U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) Model: Google Speedy DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 4 GiB MMC: dwmmc at ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc at ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc at ff0f0000: 0 In: cros-ec-keyb Out: vidconsole Err: vidconsole Model: Google Speedy rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! Net: Net Initialization Skipped No ethernet found. Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info size member to a 64-bit container? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> - Kever > >>> } > >>> > >>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > U-Boot mailing list > > U-Boot at lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> > > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-08 0:52 ` Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-08 10:21 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-08 10:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marty E. Plummer; +Cc: vagrant, u-boot, linux-rockchip [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 8469 bytes --] Marty, > On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >> >>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >>>> Hi Marty, >>>> >>>> >>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c >>>>> >>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) >>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. >>>> >>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. >>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before >>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >>>>> #include <asm/io.h> >>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> >>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> >>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> >>>>> >>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; >>>>> u32 ch; >>>>> >>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); >>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) >>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); >>>>> + if (!size_mb) { >>>> >>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, >>>> isn't it? >>>> I think don't need the changes before here. >>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) >>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out >>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. >>>>> + /* >>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>>>> + * so we reserve it >>>>> + */ >>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >>>> >>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use >>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE >>>> instead of hard code. >>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, >>> build and boot tested on my hardware. >> >> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb >> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) >> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. >> >> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what >> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). >> > A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and > sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ > * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > */ > > +#define DEBUG 1 > #include <common.h> > #include <dm.h> > #include <ram.h> > @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > > chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); > > if (rank > 1) > chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > if (row_3_4) > chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > size_mb += chipsize_mb; > + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); > debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > } > > + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); > size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); > > return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 > --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ > * Adapted from coreboot. > */ > > +#define DEBUG 1 > #include <common.h> > #include <clk.h> > #include <dm.h> > > --- > U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) > Trying to boot from SPI > > > U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) > > Model: Google Speedy > DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 > rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 > rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 > rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 > rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 > rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 > rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 > rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 > SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 > 4 GiB > MMC: dwmmc@ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc@ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc@ff0f0000: 0 > In: cros-ec-keyb > Out: vidconsole > Err: vidconsole > Model: Google Speedy > rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! > Net: Net Initialization Skipped > No ethernet found. > Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 > I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm > mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest 32bit value “plus one”). > bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would > take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just > rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. > > Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info > size member to a 64-bit container? The min() doesn’t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function ‘board_get_usable_ram_top’ just a few lines later… We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I’d rather hold off a week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in ram_info is the culprit: it’s defined as ‘size_t’, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ which again is ‘unsigned int’ on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. Expanding this to a phys_size_t won’t be doing us much good, either (as that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ‘usable RAM’ are two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as we’ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the usable ram-top is evaluated… so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions to access peripheral space—in which case there might indeed be a usable memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. From what I can tell, we’ll need to do two things: (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types for the memory size (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ‘size’ field in ram_info (it needs to be larger than 32bits I’d like Simon’s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. Regards, Philipp. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> - Kever >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> U-Boot mailing list >>> U-Boot@lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> >>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> [-- Attachment #1.2: Message signed with OpenPGP --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 529 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 127 bytes --] _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size @ 2018-05-08 10:21 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-08 10:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Marty, > On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >> >>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >>>> Hi Marty, >>>> >>>> >>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c >>>>> >>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) >>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. >>>> >>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. >>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before >>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >>>>> #include <asm/io.h> >>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> >>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> >>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> >>>>> >>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; >>>>> u32 ch; >>>>> >>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); >>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) >>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); >>>>> + if (!size_mb) { >>>> >>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, >>>> isn't it? >>>> I think don't need the changes before here. >>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) >>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out >>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. >>>>> + /* >>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>>>> + * so we reserve it >>>>> + */ >>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >>>> >>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use >>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE >>>> instead of hard code. >>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, >>> build and boot tested on my hardware. >> >> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb >> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) >> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. >> >> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what >> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). >> > A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and > sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ > * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > */ > > +#define DEBUG 1 > #include <common.h> > #include <dm.h> > #include <ram.h> > @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > > chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); > > if (rank > 1) > chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > if (row_3_4) > chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > size_mb += chipsize_mb; > + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); > debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > } > > + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); > size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); > > return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 > --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ > * Adapted from coreboot. > */ > > +#define DEBUG 1 > #include <common.h> > #include <clk.h> > #include <dm.h> > > --- > U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) > Trying to boot from SPI > > > U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) > > Model: Google Speedy > DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 > rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 > rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 > rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 > rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 > rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 > rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 > rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 > SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 > 4 GiB > MMC: dwmmc at ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc at ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc at ff0f0000: 0 > In: cros-ec-keyb > Out: vidconsole > Err: vidconsole > Model: Google Speedy > rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! > Net: Net Initialization Skipped > No ethernet found. > Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 > I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm > mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest 32bit value “plus one”). > bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would > take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just > rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. > > Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info > size member to a 64-bit container? The min() doesn’t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function ‘board_get_usable_ram_top’ just a few lines later… We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I’d rather hold off a week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in ram_info is the culprit: it’s defined as ‘size_t’, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ which again is ‘unsigned int’ on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. Expanding this to a phys_size_t won’t be doing us much good, either (as that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ‘usable RAM’ are two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as we’ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the usable ram-top is evaluated… so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions to access peripheral space—in which case there might indeed be a usable memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. From what I can tell, we’ll need to do two things: (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types for the memory size (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ‘size’ field in ram_info (it needs to be larger than 32bits I’d like Simon’s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. Regards, Philipp. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> - Kever >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> U-Boot mailing list >>> U-Boot at lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> >>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 529 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20180508/ca31ec0f/attachment.sig> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-08 10:21 ` [U-Boot] " Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-08 10:23 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-08 10:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Simon Glass Cc: vagrant, U-Boot Mailing List, Marty E. Plummer, linux-rockchip Simon, Looks like we’d like to have a 64bit type for size in ‘struct ram_info’ (see below). Let us know what you think of the proposed change. Thanks, Philipp. > On 8 May 2018, at 12:21, Dr. Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com> wrote: > > Marty, > >> On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>> >>>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >>>>> Hi Marty, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c >>>>>> >>>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) >>>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. >>>>> >>>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. >>>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before >>>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 >>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >>>>>> #include <asm/io.h> >>>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> >>>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> >>>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >>>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> >>>>>> >>>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; >>>>>> u32 ch; >>>>>> >>>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); >>>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) >>>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); >>>>>> + if (!size_mb) { >>>>> >>>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, >>>>> isn't it? >>>>> I think don't need the changes before here. >>>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) >>>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out >>>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. >>>>>> + /* >>>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>>>>> + * so we reserve it >>>>>> + */ >>>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >>>>> >>>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use >>>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE >>>>> instead of hard code. >>>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, >>>> build and boot tested on my hardware. >>> >>> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb >>> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) >>> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. >>> >>> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what >>> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). >>> >> A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and >> sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >> index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ >> * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ >> */ >> >> +#define DEBUG 1 >> #include <common.h> >> #include <dm.h> >> #include <ram.h> >> @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; >> >> chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); >> + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); >> >> if (rank > 1) >> chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); >> if (row_3_4) >> chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; >> size_mb += chipsize_mb; >> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >> debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", >> rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); >> } >> >> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >> size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); >> >> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >> diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >> index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 >> --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >> +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ >> * Adapted from coreboot. >> */ >> >> +#define DEBUG 1 >> #include <common.h> >> #include <clk.h> >> #include <dm.h> >> >> --- >> U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >> Trying to boot from SPI >> >> >> U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >> >> Model: Google Speedy >> DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 >> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 >> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 >> SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 >> 4 GiB >> MMC: dwmmc@ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc@ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc@ff0f0000: 0 >> In: cros-ec-keyb >> Out: vidconsole >> Err: vidconsole >> Model: Google Speedy >> rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! >> Net: Net Initialization Skipped >> No ethernet found. >> Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 >> I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm >> mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 > > 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest > 32bit value “plus one”). > >> bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would >> take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just >> rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. >> >> Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info >> size member to a 64-bit container? > > The min() doesn’t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function > ‘board_get_usable_ram_top’ just a few lines later… > We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I’d rather hold off a > week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid > now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. > > I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in > ram_info is the culprit: it’s defined as ‘size_t’, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ > which again is ‘unsigned int’ on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. > > Expanding this to a phys_size_t won’t be doing us much good, either (as > that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). > > The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ‘usable RAM’ are > two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with > memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as > we’ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; > however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the > usable ram-top is evaluated… so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow > the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a > lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions > to access peripheral space—in which case there might indeed be a usable > memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. > > From what I can tell, we’ll need to do two things: > (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types > for the memory size > (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ‘size’ field in ram_info (it needs > to be larger than 32bits > > I’d like Simon’s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this > change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. > > Regards, > Philipp. > >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> - Kever >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> U-Boot mailing list >>>> U-Boot@lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de>> >>>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot>> _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size @ 2018-05-08 10:23 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-08 10:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Simon, Looks like we’d like to have a 64bit type for size in ‘struct ram_info’ (see below). Let us know what you think of the proposed change. Thanks, Philipp. > On 8 May 2018, at 12:21, Dr. Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com> wrote: > > Marty, > >> On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>> >>>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >>>>> Hi Marty, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c >>>>>> >>>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) >>>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. >>>>> >>>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. >>>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before >>>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 >>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >>>>>> #include <asm/io.h> >>>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> >>>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> >>>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >>>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> >>>>>> >>>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; >>>>>> u32 ch; >>>>>> >>>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); >>>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) >>>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); >>>>>> + if (!size_mb) { >>>>> >>>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, >>>>> isn't it? >>>>> I think don't need the changes before here. >>>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) >>>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out >>>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. >>>>>> + /* >>>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>>>>> + * so we reserve it >>>>>> + */ >>>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >>>>> >>>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use >>>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE >>>>> instead of hard code. >>>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, >>>> build and boot tested on my hardware. >>> >>> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb >>> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) >>> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. >>> >>> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what >>> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). >>> >> A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and >> sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >> index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ >> * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ >> */ >> >> +#define DEBUG 1 >> #include <common.h> >> #include <dm.h> >> #include <ram.h> >> @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; >> >> chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); >> + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); >> >> if (rank > 1) >> chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); >> if (row_3_4) >> chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; >> size_mb += chipsize_mb; >> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >> debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", >> rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); >> } >> >> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >> size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); >> >> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >> diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >> index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 >> --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >> +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ >> * Adapted from coreboot. >> */ >> >> +#define DEBUG 1 >> #include <common.h> >> #include <clk.h> >> #include <dm.h> >> >> --- >> U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >> Trying to boot from SPI >> >> >> U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >> >> Model: Google Speedy >> DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 >> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 >> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 >> SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 >> 4 GiB >> MMC: dwmmc at ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc at ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc at ff0f0000: 0 >> In: cros-ec-keyb >> Out: vidconsole >> Err: vidconsole >> Model: Google Speedy >> rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! >> Net: Net Initialization Skipped >> No ethernet found. >> Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 >> I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm >> mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 > > 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest > 32bit value “plus one”). > >> bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would >> take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just >> rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. >> >> Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info >> size member to a 64-bit container? > > The min() doesn’t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function > ‘board_get_usable_ram_top’ just a few lines later… > We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I’d rather hold off a > week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid > now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. > > I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in > ram_info is the culprit: it’s defined as ‘size_t’, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ > which again is ‘unsigned int’ on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. > > Expanding this to a phys_size_t won’t be doing us much good, either (as > that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). > > The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ‘usable RAM’ are > two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with > memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as > we’ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; > however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the > usable ram-top is evaluated… so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow > the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a > lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions > to access peripheral space—in which case there might indeed be a usable > memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. > > From what I can tell, we’ll need to do two things: > (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types > for the memory size > (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ‘size’ field in ram_info (it needs > to be larger than 32bits > > I’d like Simon’s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this > change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. > > Regards, > Philipp. > >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> - Kever >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> U-Boot mailing list >>>> U-Boot at lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> <mailto:U-Boot at lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de>> >>>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot>> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-08 10:21 ` [U-Boot] " Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-08 19:21 ` Marty E. Plummer -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-08 19:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dr. Philipp Tomsich; +Cc: vagrant, u-boot, linux-rockchip On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 12:21:24PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > Marty, > > > On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > >> > >>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: > >>>> Hi Marty, > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: > >>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c > >>>>> > >>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) > >>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. > >>>> > >>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. > >>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before > >>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > >>>>> --- > >>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- > >>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > >>>>> > >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 > >>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ > >>>>> #include <asm/io.h> > >>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> > >>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> > >>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> > >>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> > >>>>> > >>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > >>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > >>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > >>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; > >>>>> u32 ch; > >>>>> > >>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > >>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > >>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > >>>>> + if (!size_mb) { > >>>> > >>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, > >>>> isn't it? > >>>> I think don't need the changes before here. > >>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) > >>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out > >>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. > >>>>> + /* > >>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > >>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > >>>>> + * so we reserve it > >>>>> + */ > >>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); > >>>> > >>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use > >>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE > >>>> instead of hard code. > >>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, > >>> build and boot tested on my hardware. > >> > >> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb > >> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) > >> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. > >> > >> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what > >> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). > >> > > A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and > > sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ > > * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > > */ > > > > +#define DEBUG 1 > > #include <common.h> > > #include <dm.h> > > #include <ram.h> > > @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > > SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > > > > chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > > + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); > > > > if (rank > 1) > > chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > > if (row_3_4) > > chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > > size_mb += chipsize_mb; > > + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); > > debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > > rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > > } > > > > + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); > > size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); > > > > return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > > diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > > index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 > > --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > > +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ > > * Adapted from coreboot. > > */ > > > > +#define DEBUG 1 > > #include <common.h> > > #include <clk.h> > > #include <dm.h> > > > > --- > > U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) > > Trying to boot from SPI > > > > > > U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) > > > > Model: Google Speedy > > DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 > > rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 > > rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 > > rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 > > rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 > > rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 > > rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 > > rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 > > SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 > > 4 GiB > > MMC: dwmmc@ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc@ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc@ff0f0000: 0 > > In: cros-ec-keyb > > Out: vidconsole > > Err: vidconsole > > Model: Google Speedy > > rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! > > Net: Net Initialization Skipped > > No ethernet found. > > Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 > > I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm > > mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 > > 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest > 32bit value ???plus one???). > > > bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would > > take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just > > rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. > > > > Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info > > size member to a 64-bit container? > > The min() doesn???t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function > ???board_get_usable_ram_top??? just a few lines later??? > We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I???d rather hold off a > week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid > now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. > > I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in > ram_info is the culprit: it???s defined as ???size_t???, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ > which again is ???unsigned int??? on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. Yeah, I was talking about this with Marek on irc yesterday, I had the same conclusion. However, being very new and inexperienced with u-boot development in general, I'm a bit averse to to messing with what appears to be a global header file, as it can easily break any other board which uses it. > > Expanding this to a phys_size_t won???t be doing us much good, either (as > that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). > > The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ???usable RAM??? are > two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with > memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as > we???ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; > however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the > usable ram-top is evaluated??? so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow > the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a > lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions > to access peripheral space???in which case there might indeed be a usable > memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. > > From what I can tell, we???ll need to do two things: > (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types > for the memory size > (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ???size??? field in ram_info (it needs > to be larger than 32bits > > I???d like Simon???s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this > change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. > > Regards, > Philipp. > > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> - Kever > >>>>> } > >>>>> > >>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > >>>> > >>>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> U-Boot mailing list > >>> U-Boot@lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> > >>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> > _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size @ 2018-05-08 19:21 ` Marty E. Plummer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-08 19:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 12:21:24PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > Marty, > > > On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > >> > >>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: > >>>> Hi Marty, > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: > >>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c > >>>>> > >>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) > >>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. > >>>> > >>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. > >>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before > >>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > >>>>> --- > >>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- > >>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > >>>>> > >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 > >>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ > >>>>> #include <asm/io.h> > >>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> > >>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> > >>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> > >>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> > >>>>> > >>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > >>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > >>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > >>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; > >>>>> u32 ch; > >>>>> > >>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > >>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > >>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > >>>>> + if (!size_mb) { > >>>> > >>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, > >>>> isn't it? > >>>> I think don't need the changes before here. > >>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) > >>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out > >>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. > >>>>> + /* > >>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > >>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > >>>>> + * so we reserve it > >>>>> + */ > >>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); > >>>> > >>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use > >>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE > >>>> instead of hard code. > >>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, > >>> build and boot tested on my hardware. > >> > >> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb > >> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) > >> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. > >> > >> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what > >> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). > >> > > A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and > > sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > > @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ > > * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > > */ > > > > +#define DEBUG 1 > > #include <common.h> > > #include <dm.h> > > #include <ram.h> > > @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > > SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > > > > chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > > + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); > > > > if (rank > 1) > > chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > > if (row_3_4) > > chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > > size_mb += chipsize_mb; > > + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); > > debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > > rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > > } > > > > + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); > > size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); > > > > return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > > diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > > index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 > > --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > > +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ > > * Adapted from coreboot. > > */ > > > > +#define DEBUG 1 > > #include <common.h> > > #include <clk.h> > > #include <dm.h> > > > > --- > > U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) > > Trying to boot from SPI > > > > > > U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) > > > > Model: Google Speedy > > DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 > > rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 > > rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 > > rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 > > rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 > > rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 > > rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 > > rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 > > SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 > > 4 GiB > > MMC: dwmmc at ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc at ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc at ff0f0000: 0 > > In: cros-ec-keyb > > Out: vidconsole > > Err: vidconsole > > Model: Google Speedy > > rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! > > Net: Net Initialization Skipped > > No ethernet found. > > Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 > > I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm > > mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 > > 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest > 32bit value ???plus one???). > > > bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would > > take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just > > rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. > > > > Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info > > size member to a 64-bit container? > > The min() doesn???t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function > ???board_get_usable_ram_top??? just a few lines later??? > We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I???d rather hold off a > week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid > now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. > > I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in > ram_info is the culprit: it???s defined as ???size_t???, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ > which again is ???unsigned int??? on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. Yeah, I was talking about this with Marek on irc yesterday, I had the same conclusion. However, being very new and inexperienced with u-boot development in general, I'm a bit averse to to messing with what appears to be a global header file, as it can easily break any other board which uses it. > > Expanding this to a phys_size_t won???t be doing us much good, either (as > that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). > > The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ???usable RAM??? are > two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with > memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as > we???ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; > however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the > usable ram-top is evaluated??? so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow > the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a > lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions > to access peripheral space???in which case there might indeed be a usable > memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. > > From what I can tell, we???ll need to do two things: > (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types > for the memory size > (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ???size??? field in ram_info (it needs > to be larger than 32bits > > I???d like Simon???s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this > change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. > > Regards, > Philipp. > > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> - Kever > >>>>> } > >>>>> > >>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > >>>> > >>>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> U-Boot mailing list > >>> U-Boot at lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> > >>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-08 19:21 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-08 21:08 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-08 21:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marty E. Plummer; +Cc: vagrant, u-boot, linux-rockchip > On 8 May 2018, at 21:21, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 12:21:24PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >> Marty, >> >>> On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >>>>>> Hi Marty, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>>>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) >>>>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. >>>>>> >>>>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. >>>>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before >>>>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 >>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >>>>>>> #include <asm/io.h> >>>>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> >>>>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> >>>>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >>>>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>>>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; >>>>>>> u32 ch; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); >>>>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) >>>>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); >>>>>>> + if (!size_mb) { >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, >>>>>> isn't it? >>>>>> I think don't need the changes before here. >>>>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) >>>>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out >>>>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. >>>>>>> + /* >>>>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>>>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>>>>>> + * so we reserve it >>>>>>> + */ >>>>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >>>>>> >>>>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use >>>>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE >>>>>> instead of hard code. >>>>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, >>>>> build and boot tested on my hardware. >>>> >>>> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb >>>> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) >>>> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. >>>> >>>> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what >>>> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). >>>> >>> A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and >>> sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ >>> * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ >>> */ >>> >>> +#define DEBUG 1 >>> #include <common.h> >>> #include <dm.h> >>> #include <ram.h> >>> @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; >>> >>> chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); >>> + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); >>> >>> if (rank > 1) >>> chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); >>> if (row_3_4) >>> chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; >>> size_mb += chipsize_mb; >>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >>> debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", >>> rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); >>> } >>> >>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >>> size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); >>> >>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>> diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>> index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>> +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ >>> * Adapted from coreboot. >>> */ >>> >>> +#define DEBUG 1 >>> #include <common.h> >>> #include <clk.h> >>> #include <dm.h> >>> >>> --- >>> U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >>> Trying to boot from SPI >>> >>> >>> U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >>> >>> Model: Google Speedy >>> DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 >>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 >>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 >>> SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 >>> 4 GiB >>> MMC: dwmmc@ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc@ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc@ff0f0000: 0 >>> In: cros-ec-keyb >>> Out: vidconsole >>> Err: vidconsole >>> Model: Google Speedy >>> rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! >>> Net: Net Initialization Skipped >>> No ethernet found. >>> Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 >>> I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm >>> mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 >> >> 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest >> 32bit value ???plus one???). >> >>> bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would >>> take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just >>> rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. >>> >>> Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info >>> size member to a 64-bit container? >> >> The min() doesn???t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function >> ???board_get_usable_ram_top??? just a few lines later??? >> We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I???d rather hold off a >> week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid >> now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. >> >> I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in >> ram_info is the culprit: it???s defined as ???size_t???, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ >> which again is ???unsigned int??? on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. > Yeah, I was talking about this with Marek on irc yesterday, I had the > same conclusion. However, being very new and inexperienced with u-boot > development in general, I'm a bit averse to to messing with what appears > to be a global header file, as it can easily break any other board which > uses it. No problem — let’s wait for Simon’s input and I’ll create the patchset. I’ll need your help testing, as I don’t have any 32bit platforms w/ 4GB… and I’ll let you know once something is ready for you to test. >> >> Expanding this to a phys_size_t won???t be doing us much good, either (as >> that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). >> >> The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ???usable RAM??? are >> two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with >> memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as >> we???ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; >> however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the >> usable ram-top is evaluated??? so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow >> the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a >> lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions >> to access peripheral space???in which case there might indeed be a usable >> memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. >> >> From what I can tell, we???ll need to do two things: >> (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types >> for the memory size >> (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ???size??? field in ram_info (it needs >> to be larger than 32bits >> >> I???d like Simon???s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this >> change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. >> >> Regards, >> Philipp. >> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> - Kever >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> >>>>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> U-Boot mailing list >>>>> U-Boot@lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> >>>>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size @ 2018-05-08 21:08 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-08 21:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot > On 8 May 2018, at 21:21, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 12:21:24PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >> Marty, >> >>> On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >>>>>> Hi Marty, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>>>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) >>>>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. >>>>>> >>>>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. >>>>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before >>>>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 >>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >>>>>>> #include <asm/io.h> >>>>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> >>>>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> >>>>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >>>>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>>>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; >>>>>>> u32 ch; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); >>>>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) >>>>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); >>>>>>> + if (!size_mb) { >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, >>>>>> isn't it? >>>>>> I think don't need the changes before here. >>>>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) >>>>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out >>>>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. >>>>>>> + /* >>>>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>>>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>>>>>> + * so we reserve it >>>>>>> + */ >>>>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >>>>>> >>>>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use >>>>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE >>>>>> instead of hard code. >>>>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, >>>>> build and boot tested on my hardware. >>>> >>>> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb >>>> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) >>>> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. >>>> >>>> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what >>>> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). >>>> >>> A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and >>> sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ >>> * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ >>> */ >>> >>> +#define DEBUG 1 >>> #include <common.h> >>> #include <dm.h> >>> #include <ram.h> >>> @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; >>> >>> chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); >>> + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); >>> >>> if (rank > 1) >>> chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); >>> if (row_3_4) >>> chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; >>> size_mb += chipsize_mb; >>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >>> debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", >>> rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); >>> } >>> >>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >>> size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); >>> >>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>> diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>> index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>> +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ >>> * Adapted from coreboot. >>> */ >>> >>> +#define DEBUG 1 >>> #include <common.h> >>> #include <clk.h> >>> #include <dm.h> >>> >>> --- >>> U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >>> Trying to boot from SPI >>> >>> >>> U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >>> >>> Model: Google Speedy >>> DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 >>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 >>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 >>> SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 >>> 4 GiB >>> MMC: dwmmc at ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc at ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc at ff0f0000: 0 >>> In: cros-ec-keyb >>> Out: vidconsole >>> Err: vidconsole >>> Model: Google Speedy >>> rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! >>> Net: Net Initialization Skipped >>> No ethernet found. >>> Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 >>> I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm >>> mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 >> >> 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest >> 32bit value ???plus one???). >> >>> bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would >>> take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just >>> rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. >>> >>> Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info >>> size member to a 64-bit container? >> >> The min() doesn???t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function >> ???board_get_usable_ram_top??? just a few lines later??? >> We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I???d rather hold off a >> week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid >> now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. >> >> I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in >> ram_info is the culprit: it???s defined as ???size_t???, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ >> which again is ???unsigned int??? on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. > Yeah, I was talking about this with Marek on irc yesterday, I had the > same conclusion. However, being very new and inexperienced with u-boot > development in general, I'm a bit averse to to messing with what appears > to be a global header file, as it can easily break any other board which > uses it. No problem — let’s wait for Simon’s input and I’ll create the patchset. I’ll need your help testing, as I don’t have any 32bit platforms w/ 4GB… and I’ll let you know once something is ready for you to test. >> >> Expanding this to a phys_size_t won???t be doing us much good, either (as >> that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). >> >> The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ???usable RAM??? are >> two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with >> memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as >> we???ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; >> however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the >> usable ram-top is evaluated??? so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow >> the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a >> lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions >> to access peripheral space???in which case there might indeed be a usable >> memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. >> >> From what I can tell, we???ll need to do two things: >> (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types >> for the memory size >> (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ???size??? field in ram_info (it needs >> to be larger than 32bits >> >> I???d like Simon???s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this >> change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. >> >> Regards, >> Philipp. >> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> - Kever >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> >>>>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> U-Boot mailing list >>>>> U-Boot at lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> >>>>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <C5B7DFAE-C5CA-4D9E-B6CB-C44E9AD974E9-SN7IsUiht6C/RdPyistoZJqQE7yCjDx5@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-08 21:08 ` [U-Boot] " Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-09 5:29 ` Marty E. Plummer -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-09 5:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dr. Philipp Tomsich Cc: vagrant-8fiUuRrzOP0dnm+yROfE0A, u-boot-0aAXYlwwYIKGBzrmiIFOJg, Kever Yang, linux-rockchip-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 11:08:14PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > > > On 8 May 2018, at 21:21, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer-zVALfsKDk1AS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 12:21:24PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > >> Marty, > >> > >>> On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer-zVALfsKDk1AS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer-zVALfsKDk1AS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: > >>>>>> Hi Marty, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: > >>>>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) > >>>>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. > >>>>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before > >>>>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer-zVALfsKDk1AS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org> > >>>>>>> --- > >>>>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- > >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>>>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 > >>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>>>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ > >>>>>>> #include <asm/io.h> > >>>>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> > >>>>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> > >>>>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> > >>>>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > >>>>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > >>>>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > >>>>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; > >>>>>>> u32 ch; > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > >>>>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > >>>>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > >>>>>>> + if (!size_mb) { > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, > >>>>>> isn't it? > >>>>>> I think don't need the changes before here. > >>>>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) > >>>>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out > >>>>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. > >>>>>>> + /* > >>>>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > >>>>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > >>>>>>> + * so we reserve it > >>>>>>> + */ > >>>>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); > >>>>>> > >>>>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use > >>>>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE > >>>>>> instead of hard code. > >>>>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, > >>>>> build and boot tested on my hardware. > >>>> > >>>> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb > >>>> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) > >>>> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. > >>>> > >>>> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what > >>>> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). > >>>> > >>> A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and > >>> sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>> index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 > >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ > >>> * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > >>> */ > >>> > >>> +#define DEBUG 1 > >>> #include <common.h> > >>> #include <dm.h> > >>> #include <ram.h> > >>> @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > >>> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > >>> > >>> chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > >>> + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); > >>> > >>> if (rank > 1) > >>> chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > >>> if (row_3_4) > >>> chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > >>> size_mb += chipsize_mb; > >>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); > >>> debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > >>> rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > >>> } > >>> > >>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); > >>> size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); > >>> > >>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > >>> diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > >>> index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 > >>> --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > >>> +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > >>> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ > >>> * Adapted from coreboot. > >>> */ > >>> > >>> +#define DEBUG 1 > >>> #include <common.h> > >>> #include <clk.h> > >>> #include <dm.h> > >>> > >>> --- > >>> U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) > >>> Trying to boot from SPI > >>> > >>> > >>> U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) > >>> > >>> Model: Google Speedy > >>> DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 > >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 > >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 > >>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 > >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 > >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 > >>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 > >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 > >>> SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 > >>> 4 GiB > >>> MMC: dwmmc@ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc@ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc@ff0f0000: 0 > >>> In: cros-ec-keyb > >>> Out: vidconsole > >>> Err: vidconsole > >>> Model: Google Speedy > >>> rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! > >>> Net: Net Initialization Skipped > >>> No ethernet found. > >>> Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 > >>> I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm > >>> mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 > >> > >> 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest > >> 32bit value ???plus one???). > >> > >>> bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would > >>> take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just > >>> rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. > >>> > >>> Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info > >>> size member to a 64-bit container? > >> > >> The min() doesn???t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function > >> ???board_get_usable_ram_top??? just a few lines later??? > >> We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I???d rather hold off a > >> week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid > >> now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. > >> > >> I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in > >> ram_info is the culprit: it???s defined as ???size_t???, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ > >> which again is ???unsigned int??? on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. > > Yeah, I was talking about this with Marek on irc yesterday, I had the > > same conclusion. However, being very new and inexperienced with u-boot > > development in general, I'm a bit averse to to messing with what appears > > to be a global header file, as it can easily break any other board which > > uses it. > > No problem ??? let???s wait for Simon???s input and I???ll create the patchset. > I???ll need your help testing, as I don???t have any 32bit platforms w/ 4GB??? and I???ll > let you know once something is ready for you to test. > Even if we do change ram_info.size into a larger, 64-bit variable, we should still probably use that min call since with a 32-bit address space, even with 4GiB ram physically, the rk3288 can only address 0xff00000 of ram, which is just a tad shy of the full 4GiB. > >> > >> Expanding this to a phys_size_t won???t be doing us much good, either (as > >> that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). > >> > >> The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ???usable RAM??? are > >> two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with > >> memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as > >> we???ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; > >> however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the > >> usable ram-top is evaluated??? so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow > >> the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a > >> lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions > >> to access peripheral space???in which case there might indeed be a usable > >> memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. > >> > >> From what I can tell, we???ll need to do two things: > >> (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types > >> for the memory size > >> (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ???size??? field in ram_info (it needs > >> to be larger than 32bits > >> > >> I???d like Simon???s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this > >> change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Philipp. > >> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>> - Kever > >>>>>>> } > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> U-Boot mailing list > >>>>> U-Boot-0aAXYlwwYIKGBzrmiIFOJg@public.gmane.org <mailto:U-Boot-0aAXYlwwYIKGBzrmiIFOJg@public.gmane.org> > >>>>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size @ 2018-05-09 5:29 ` Marty E. Plummer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-09 5:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 11:08:14PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > > > On 8 May 2018, at 21:21, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 12:21:24PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > >> Marty, > >> > >>> On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: > >>>>>> Hi Marty, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: > >>>>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) > >>>>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. > >>>>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before > >>>>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> > >>>>>>> --- > >>>>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- > >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>>>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 > >>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>>>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ > >>>>>>> #include <asm/io.h> > >>>>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> > >>>>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> > >>>>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> > >>>>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > >>>>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > >>>>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > >>>>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; > >>>>>>> u32 ch; > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); > >>>>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) > >>>>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); > >>>>>>> + if (!size_mb) { > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, > >>>>>> isn't it? > >>>>>> I think don't need the changes before here. > >>>>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) > >>>>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out > >>>>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. > >>>>>>> + /* > >>>>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space > >>>>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space > >>>>>>> + * so we reserve it > >>>>>>> + */ > >>>>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); > >>>>>> > >>>>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use > >>>>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE > >>>>>> instead of hard code. > >>>>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, > >>>>> build and boot tested on my hardware. > >>>> > >>>> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb > >>>> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) > >>>> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. > >>>> > >>>> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what > >>>> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). > >>>> > >>> A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and > >>> sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>> index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 > >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c > >>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ > >>> * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > >>> */ > >>> > >>> +#define DEBUG 1 > >>> #include <common.h> > >>> #include <dm.h> > >>> #include <ram.h> > >>> @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) > >>> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; > >>> > >>> chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); > >>> + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); > >>> > >>> if (rank > 1) > >>> chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); > >>> if (row_3_4) > >>> chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; > >>> size_mb += chipsize_mb; > >>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); > >>> debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", > >>> rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); > >>> } > >>> > >>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); > >>> size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); > >>> > >>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > >>> diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > >>> index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 > >>> --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > >>> +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c > >>> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ > >>> * Adapted from coreboot. > >>> */ > >>> > >>> +#define DEBUG 1 > >>> #include <common.h> > >>> #include <clk.h> > >>> #include <dm.h> > >>> > >>> --- > >>> U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) > >>> Trying to boot from SPI > >>> > >>> > >>> U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) > >>> > >>> Model: Google Speedy > >>> DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 > >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 > >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 > >>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 > >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 > >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 > >>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 > >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 > >>> SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 > >>> 4 GiB > >>> MMC: dwmmc at ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc at ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc at ff0f0000: 0 > >>> In: cros-ec-keyb > >>> Out: vidconsole > >>> Err: vidconsole > >>> Model: Google Speedy > >>> rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! > >>> Net: Net Initialization Skipped > >>> No ethernet found. > >>> Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 > >>> I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm > >>> mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 > >> > >> 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest > >> 32bit value ???plus one???). > >> > >>> bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would > >>> take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just > >>> rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. > >>> > >>> Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info > >>> size member to a 64-bit container? > >> > >> The min() doesn???t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function > >> ???board_get_usable_ram_top??? just a few lines later??? > >> We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I???d rather hold off a > >> week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid > >> now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. > >> > >> I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in > >> ram_info is the culprit: it???s defined as ???size_t???, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ > >> which again is ???unsigned int??? on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. > > Yeah, I was talking about this with Marek on irc yesterday, I had the > > same conclusion. However, being very new and inexperienced with u-boot > > development in general, I'm a bit averse to to messing with what appears > > to be a global header file, as it can easily break any other board which > > uses it. > > No problem ??? let???s wait for Simon???s input and I???ll create the patchset. > I???ll need your help testing, as I don???t have any 32bit platforms w/ 4GB??? and I???ll > let you know once something is ready for you to test. > Even if we do change ram_info.size into a larger, 64-bit variable, we should still probably use that min call since with a 32-bit address space, even with 4GiB ram physically, the rk3288 can only address 0xff00000 of ram, which is just a tad shy of the full 4GiB. > >> > >> Expanding this to a phys_size_t won???t be doing us much good, either (as > >> that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). > >> > >> The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ???usable RAM??? are > >> two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with > >> memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as > >> we???ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; > >> however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the > >> usable ram-top is evaluated??? so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow > >> the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a > >> lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions > >> to access peripheral space???in which case there might indeed be a usable > >> memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. > >> > >> From what I can tell, we???ll need to do two things: > >> (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types > >> for the memory size > >> (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ???size??? field in ram_info (it needs > >> to be larger than 32bits > >> > >> I???d like Simon???s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this > >> change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Philipp. > >> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>> - Kever > >>>>>>> } > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> U-Boot mailing list > >>>>> U-Boot at lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> > >>>>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-09 5:29 ` Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-09 7:24 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-09 7:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marty E. Plummer; +Cc: vagrant, u-boot, linux-rockchip > On 9 May 2018, at 07:29, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 11:08:14PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >> >>> On 8 May 2018, at 21:21, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 12:21:24PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>> Marty, >>>> >>>>> On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi Marty, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>>>>>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) >>>>>>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. >>>>>>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before >>>>>>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 >>>>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >>>>>>>>> #include <asm/io.h> >>>>>>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> >>>>>>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> >>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>>>>>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; >>>>>>>>> u32 ch; >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); >>>>>>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) >>>>>>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); >>>>>>>>> + if (!size_mb) { >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, >>>>>>>> isn't it? >>>>>>>> I think don't need the changes before here. >>>>>>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) >>>>>>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out >>>>>>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. >>>>>>>>> + /* >>>>>>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>>>>>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>>>>>>>> + * so we reserve it >>>>>>>>> + */ >>>>>>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use >>>>>>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE >>>>>>>> instead of hard code. >>>>>>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, >>>>>>> build and boot tested on my hardware. >>>>>> >>>>>> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb >>>>>> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) >>>>>> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. >>>>>> >>>>>> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what >>>>>> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). >>>>>> >>>>> A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and >>>>> sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>> index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ >>>>> * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ >>>>> */ >>>>> >>>>> +#define DEBUG 1 >>>>> #include <common.h> >>>>> #include <dm.h> >>>>> #include <ram.h> >>>>> @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; >>>>> >>>>> chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); >>>>> + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); >>>>> >>>>> if (rank > 1) >>>>> chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); >>>>> if (row_3_4) >>>>> chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; >>>>> size_mb += chipsize_mb; >>>>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >>>>> debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", >>>>> rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >>>>> size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); >>>>> >>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>>>> index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>>>> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ >>>>> * Adapted from coreboot. >>>>> */ >>>>> >>>>> +#define DEBUG 1 >>>>> #include <common.h> >>>>> #include <clk.h> >>>>> #include <dm.h> >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >>>>> Trying to boot from SPI >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >>>>> >>>>> Model: Google Speedy >>>>> DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 >>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 >>>>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 >>>>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 >>>>> SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 >>>>> 4 GiB >>>>> MMC: dwmmc@ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc@ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc@ff0f0000: 0 >>>>> In: cros-ec-keyb >>>>> Out: vidconsole >>>>> Err: vidconsole >>>>> Model: Google Speedy >>>>> rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! >>>>> Net: Net Initialization Skipped >>>>> No ethernet found. >>>>> Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 >>>>> I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm >>>>> mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 >>>> >>>> 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest >>>> 32bit value ???plus one???). >>>> >>>>> bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would >>>>> take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just >>>>> rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. >>>>> >>>>> Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info >>>>> size member to a 64-bit container? >>>> >>>> The min() doesn???t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function >>>> ???board_get_usable_ram_top??? just a few lines later??? >>>> We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I???d rather hold off a >>>> week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid >>>> now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. >>>> >>>> I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in >>>> ram_info is the culprit: it???s defined as ???size_t???, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ >>>> which again is ???unsigned int??? on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. >>> Yeah, I was talking about this with Marek on irc yesterday, I had the >>> same conclusion. However, being very new and inexperienced with u-boot >>> development in general, I'm a bit averse to to messing with what appears >>> to be a global header file, as it can easily break any other board which >>> uses it. >> >> No problem ??? let???s wait for Simon???s input and I???ll create the patchset. >> I???ll need your help testing, as I don???t have any 32bit platforms w/ 4GB??? and I???ll >> let you know once something is ready for you to test. >> > Even if we do change ram_info.size into a larger, 64-bit variable, we > should still probably use that min call since with a 32-bit address > space, even with 4GiB ram physically, the rk3288 can only address > 0xff00000 of ram, which is just a tad shy of the full 4GiB. This is not the meaning of ram_info.size, though… for the addressability there’s the ‘board_get_usable_ram_top’ hook used today. Unfortunately, there’s no formal definition (i.e. clear documentation of this in a header file) of board_get_usable_ram_top; however, the default (weak) implementation in board_f hints at the intent to use it to clip the end if the ’size’ field exceeds the addressable space: /* * Detect whether we have so much RAM that it goes past the end of our * 32-bit address space. If so, clip the usable RAM so it doesn't. */ This is also consistent with usage on Tegra and a few others. Until someone decides that ram_info should not hold the DRAM controller’s view, but rather consider addressability by the CPU, I strongly disagree with applying the carveout for the MMIO this early. Also note that just because this part of memory is not addressable from the CPUs does not necessarily mean that it is not addressable from one of the DMA controllers (I don’t know enough about the internal implementation of the address decode logic in this SoC to determine whether that part of memory is really unaccessible or if it is merely “special”). >>>> >>>> Expanding this to a phys_size_t won???t be doing us much good, either (as >>>> that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). >>>> >>>> The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ???usable RAM??? are >>>> two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with >>>> memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as >>>> we???ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; >>>> however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the >>>> usable ram-top is evaluated??? so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow >>>> the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a >>>> lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions >>>> to access peripheral space???in which case there might indeed be a usable >>>> memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. >>>> >>>> From what I can tell, we???ll need to do two things: >>>> (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types >>>> for the memory size >>>> (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ???size??? field in ram_info (it needs >>>> to be larger than 32bits >>>> >>>> I???d like Simon???s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this >>>> change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Philipp. >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> - Kever >>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> U-Boot mailing list >>>>>>> U-Boot@lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> >>>>>>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size @ 2018-05-09 7:24 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-09 7:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot > On 9 May 2018, at 07:29, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 11:08:14PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >> >>> On 8 May 2018, at 21:21, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 12:21:24PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>> Marty, >>>> >>>>> On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi Marty, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>>>>>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) >>>>>>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. >>>>>>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before >>>>>>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 >>>>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >>>>>>>>> #include <asm/io.h> >>>>>>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> >>>>>>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> >>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>>>>>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; >>>>>>>>> u32 ch; >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); >>>>>>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) >>>>>>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); >>>>>>>>> + if (!size_mb) { >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, >>>>>>>> isn't it? >>>>>>>> I think don't need the changes before here. >>>>>>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) >>>>>>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out >>>>>>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. >>>>>>>>> + /* >>>>>>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>>>>>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>>>>>>>> + * so we reserve it >>>>>>>>> + */ >>>>>>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use >>>>>>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE >>>>>>>> instead of hard code. >>>>>>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, >>>>>>> build and boot tested on my hardware. >>>>>> >>>>>> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb >>>>>> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) >>>>>> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. >>>>>> >>>>>> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what >>>>>> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). >>>>>> >>>>> A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and >>>>> sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>> index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ >>>>> * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ >>>>> */ >>>>> >>>>> +#define DEBUG 1 >>>>> #include <common.h> >>>>> #include <dm.h> >>>>> #include <ram.h> >>>>> @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; >>>>> >>>>> chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); >>>>> + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); >>>>> >>>>> if (rank > 1) >>>>> chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); >>>>> if (row_3_4) >>>>> chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; >>>>> size_mb += chipsize_mb; >>>>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >>>>> debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", >>>>> rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >>>>> size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); >>>>> >>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>>>> index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>>>> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ >>>>> * Adapted from coreboot. >>>>> */ >>>>> >>>>> +#define DEBUG 1 >>>>> #include <common.h> >>>>> #include <clk.h> >>>>> #include <dm.h> >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >>>>> Trying to boot from SPI >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >>>>> >>>>> Model: Google Speedy >>>>> DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 >>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 >>>>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 >>>>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 >>>>> SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 >>>>> 4 GiB >>>>> MMC: dwmmc at ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc at ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc at ff0f0000: 0 >>>>> In: cros-ec-keyb >>>>> Out: vidconsole >>>>> Err: vidconsole >>>>> Model: Google Speedy >>>>> rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! >>>>> Net: Net Initialization Skipped >>>>> No ethernet found. >>>>> Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 >>>>> I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm >>>>> mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 >>>> >>>> 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest >>>> 32bit value ???plus one???). >>>> >>>>> bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would >>>>> take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just >>>>> rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. >>>>> >>>>> Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info >>>>> size member to a 64-bit container? >>>> >>>> The min() doesn???t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function >>>> ???board_get_usable_ram_top??? just a few lines later??? >>>> We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I???d rather hold off a >>>> week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid >>>> now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. >>>> >>>> I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in >>>> ram_info is the culprit: it???s defined as ???size_t???, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ >>>> which again is ???unsigned int??? on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. >>> Yeah, I was talking about this with Marek on irc yesterday, I had the >>> same conclusion. However, being very new and inexperienced with u-boot >>> development in general, I'm a bit averse to to messing with what appears >>> to be a global header file, as it can easily break any other board which >>> uses it. >> >> No problem ??? let???s wait for Simon???s input and I???ll create the patchset. >> I???ll need your help testing, as I don???t have any 32bit platforms w/ 4GB??? and I???ll >> let you know once something is ready for you to test. >> > Even if we do change ram_info.size into a larger, 64-bit variable, we > should still probably use that min call since with a 32-bit address > space, even with 4GiB ram physically, the rk3288 can only address > 0xff00000 of ram, which is just a tad shy of the full 4GiB. This is not the meaning of ram_info.size, though… for the addressability there’s the ‘board_get_usable_ram_top’ hook used today. Unfortunately, there’s no formal definition (i.e. clear documentation of this in a header file) of board_get_usable_ram_top; however, the default (weak) implementation in board_f hints at the intent to use it to clip the end if the ’size’ field exceeds the addressable space: /* * Detect whether we have so much RAM that it goes past the end of our * 32-bit address space. If so, clip the usable RAM so it doesn't. */ This is also consistent with usage on Tegra and a few others. Until someone decides that ram_info should not hold the DRAM controller’s view, but rather consider addressability by the CPU, I strongly disagree with applying the carveout for the MMIO this early. Also note that just because this part of memory is not addressable from the CPUs does not necessarily mean that it is not addressable from one of the DMA controllers (I don’t know enough about the internal implementation of the address decode logic in this SoC to determine whether that part of memory is really unaccessible or if it is merely “special”). >>>> >>>> Expanding this to a phys_size_t won???t be doing us much good, either (as >>>> that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). >>>> >>>> The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ???usable RAM??? are >>>> two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with >>>> memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as >>>> we???ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; >>>> however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the >>>> usable ram-top is evaluated??? so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow >>>> the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a >>>> lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions >>>> to access peripheral space???in which case there might indeed be a usable >>>> memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. >>>> >>>> From what I can tell, we???ll need to do two things: >>>> (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types >>>> for the memory size >>>> (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ???size??? field in ram_info (it needs >>>> to be larger than 32bits >>>> >>>> I???d like Simon???s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this >>>> change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Philipp. >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> - Kever >>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> U-Boot mailing list >>>>>>> U-Boot at lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> >>>>>>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-09 7:24 ` [U-Boot] " Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-14 15:56 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-14 15:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marty E. Plummer; +Cc: vagrant, u-boot, linux-rockchip I had a bit more time to look into this and it looks as if we have two problem-spots... First, there's a type-mismatch between ram_info.size (a size_t) and gd.ram_size (phys_size_t). While we can increase the size of a phys_size_t to 64bit (by defining CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT), the size_t will always be an unsigned int on a 32bit arm architecture. So here’s one possible pitfall that should be resolved. Once this is adjusted, we might just increase the width of ram_info.size to 64bit by enabling CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT … however, this comes with a caveat: the default cell sizes for the FDT (via fdtdec) also increases. I.e. if any come in our arch or the drivers still goes through the fdtdec-functions, we’ll end up with a problem. As my test coverage is limited to 64bit targets, I can’t tell whether defining the PHYS_64BIT configuration would be possible for the RK3288 — if it is, we’d have a rather easy way forward and could reuse the phys_size_t for ram_info.size. I’d appreciate if you could take a look at whether CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT gets us into a lot of trouble on the RK3288 or whether this will trigger just a few minor adjustments… Thanks, Philipp. > On 9 May 2018, at 09:24, Dr. Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com> wrote: > >> >> On 9 May 2018, at 07:29, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 11:08:14PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>> >>>> On 8 May 2018, at 21:21, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 12:21:24PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>>> Marty, >>>>> >>>>>> On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >>>>>>>>> Hi Marty, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) >>>>>>>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. >>>>>>>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before >>>>>>>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 >>>>>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >>>>>>>>>> #include <asm/io.h> >>>>>>>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> >>>>>>>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> >>>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >>>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>>>>>>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>>>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>>>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; >>>>>>>>>> u32 ch; >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); >>>>>>>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) >>>>>>>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); >>>>>>>>>> + if (!size_mb) { >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, >>>>>>>>> isn't it? >>>>>>>>> I think don't need the changes before here. >>>>>>>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) >>>>>>>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out >>>>>>>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. >>>>>>>>>> + /* >>>>>>>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>>>>>>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>>>>>>>>> + * so we reserve it >>>>>>>>>> + */ >>>>>>>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use >>>>>>>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE >>>>>>>>> instead of hard code. >>>>>>>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, >>>>>>>> build and boot tested on my hardware. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb >>>>>>> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) >>>>>>> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what >>>>>>> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). >>>>>>> >>>>>> A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and >>>>>> sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 >>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ >>>>>> * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ >>>>>> */ >>>>>> >>>>>> +#define DEBUG 1 >>>>>> #include <common.h> >>>>>> #include <dm.h> >>>>>> #include <ram.h> >>>>>> @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; >>>>>> >>>>>> chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); >>>>>> + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); >>>>>> >>>>>> if (rank > 1) >>>>>> chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); >>>>>> if (row_3_4) >>>>>> chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; >>>>>> size_mb += chipsize_mb; >>>>>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >>>>>> debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", >>>>>> rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >>>>>> size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); >>>>>> >>>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>>>>> index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 >>>>>> --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>>>>> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ >>>>>> * Adapted from coreboot. >>>>>> */ >>>>>> >>>>>> +#define DEBUG 1 >>>>>> #include <common.h> >>>>>> #include <clk.h> >>>>>> #include <dm.h> >>>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >>>>>> Trying to boot from SPI >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >>>>>> >>>>>> Model: Google Speedy >>>>>> DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 >>>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >>>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 >>>>>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >>>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >>>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 >>>>>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >>>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 >>>>>> SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 >>>>>> 4 GiB >>>>>> MMC: dwmmc@ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc@ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc@ff0f0000: 0 >>>>>> In: cros-ec-keyb >>>>>> Out: vidconsole >>>>>> Err: vidconsole >>>>>> Model: Google Speedy >>>>>> rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! >>>>>> Net: Net Initialization Skipped >>>>>> No ethernet found. >>>>>> Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 >>>>>> I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm >>>>>> mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 >>>>> >>>>> 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest >>>>> 32bit value ???plus one???). >>>>> >>>>>> bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would >>>>>> take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just >>>>>> rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info >>>>>> size member to a 64-bit container? >>>>> >>>>> The min() doesn???t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function >>>>> ???board_get_usable_ram_top??? just a few lines later??? >>>>> We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I???d rather hold off a >>>>> week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid >>>>> now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. >>>>> >>>>> I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in >>>>> ram_info is the culprit: it???s defined as ???size_t???, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ >>>>> which again is ???unsigned int??? on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. >>>> Yeah, I was talking about this with Marek on irc yesterday, I had the >>>> same conclusion. However, being very new and inexperienced with u-boot >>>> development in general, I'm a bit averse to to messing with what appears >>>> to be a global header file, as it can easily break any other board which >>>> uses it. >>> >>> No problem ??? let???s wait for Simon???s input and I???ll create the patchset. >>> I???ll need your help testing, as I don???t have any 32bit platforms w/ 4GB??? and I???ll >>> let you know once something is ready for you to test. >>> >> Even if we do change ram_info.size into a larger, 64-bit variable, we >> should still probably use that min call since with a 32-bit address >> space, even with 4GiB ram physically, the rk3288 can only address >> 0xff00000 of ram, which is just a tad shy of the full 4GiB. > > This is not the meaning of ram_info.size, though… for the addressability there’s > the ‘board_get_usable_ram_top’ hook used today. > > Unfortunately, there’s no formal definition (i.e. clear documentation of this in a header > file) of board_get_usable_ram_top; however, the default (weak) implementation in > board_f hints at the intent to use it to clip the end if the ’size’ field exceeds the > addressable space: > /* > * Detect whether we have so much RAM that it goes past the end of our > * 32-bit address space. If so, clip the usable RAM so it doesn't. > */ > > This is also consistent with usage on Tegra and a few others. > Until someone decides that ram_info should not hold the DRAM controller’s view, > but rather consider addressability by the CPU, I strongly disagree with applying > the carveout for the MMIO this early. > > Also note that just because this part of memory is not addressable from the CPUs > does not necessarily mean that it is not addressable from one of the DMA controllers > (I don’t know enough about the internal implementation of the address decode logic > in this SoC to determine whether that part of memory is really unaccessible or if it > is merely “special”). > >>>>> >>>>> Expanding this to a phys_size_t won???t be doing us much good, either (as >>>>> that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). >>>>> >>>>> The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ???usable RAM??? are >>>>> two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with >>>>> memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as >>>>> we???ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; >>>>> however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the >>>>> usable ram-top is evaluated??? so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow >>>>> the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a >>>>> lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions >>>>> to access peripheral space???in which case there might indeed be a usable >>>>> memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. >>>>> >>>>> From what I can tell, we???ll need to do two things: >>>>> (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types >>>>> for the memory size >>>>> (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ???size??? field in ram_info (it needs >>>>> to be larger than 32bits >>>>> >>>>> I???d like Simon???s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this >>>>> change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Philipp. >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> - Kever >>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> U-Boot mailing list >>>>>>>> U-Boot@lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> >>>>>>>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> > > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot@lists.denx.de > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size @ 2018-05-14 15:56 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-14 15:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot I had a bit more time to look into this and it looks as if we have two problem-spots... First, there's a type-mismatch between ram_info.size (a size_t) and gd.ram_size (phys_size_t). While we can increase the size of a phys_size_t to 64bit (by defining CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT), the size_t will always be an unsigned int on a 32bit arm architecture. So here’s one possible pitfall that should be resolved. Once this is adjusted, we might just increase the width of ram_info.size to 64bit by enabling CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT … however, this comes with a caveat: the default cell sizes for the FDT (via fdtdec) also increases. I.e. if any come in our arch or the drivers still goes through the fdtdec-functions, we’ll end up with a problem. As my test coverage is limited to 64bit targets, I can’t tell whether defining the PHYS_64BIT configuration would be possible for the RK3288 — if it is, we’d have a rather easy way forward and could reuse the phys_size_t for ram_info.size. I’d appreciate if you could take a look at whether CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT gets us into a lot of trouble on the RK3288 or whether this will trigger just a few minor adjustments… Thanks, Philipp. > On 9 May 2018, at 09:24, Dr. Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com> wrote: > >> >> On 9 May 2018, at 07:29, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 11:08:14PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>> >>>> On 8 May 2018, at 21:21, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 12:21:24PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>>> Marty, >>>>> >>>>>> On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >>>>>>>>> Hi Marty, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) >>>>>>>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. >>>>>>>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before >>>>>>>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 >>>>>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >>>>>>>>>> #include <asm/io.h> >>>>>>>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> >>>>>>>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> >>>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >>>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>>>>>>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>>>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>>>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; >>>>>>>>>> u32 ch; >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); >>>>>>>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) >>>>>>>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); >>>>>>>>>> + if (!size_mb) { >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, >>>>>>>>> isn't it? >>>>>>>>> I think don't need the changes before here. >>>>>>>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) >>>>>>>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out >>>>>>>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. >>>>>>>>>> + /* >>>>>>>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>>>>>>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>>>>>>>>> + * so we reserve it >>>>>>>>>> + */ >>>>>>>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use >>>>>>>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE >>>>>>>>> instead of hard code. >>>>>>>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, >>>>>>>> build and boot tested on my hardware. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb >>>>>>> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) >>>>>>> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what >>>>>>> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). >>>>>>> >>>>>> A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and >>>>>> sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 >>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ >>>>>> * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ >>>>>> */ >>>>>> >>>>>> +#define DEBUG 1 >>>>>> #include <common.h> >>>>>> #include <dm.h> >>>>>> #include <ram.h> >>>>>> @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; >>>>>> >>>>>> chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); >>>>>> + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); >>>>>> >>>>>> if (rank > 1) >>>>>> chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); >>>>>> if (row_3_4) >>>>>> chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; >>>>>> size_mb += chipsize_mb; >>>>>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >>>>>> debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", >>>>>> rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >>>>>> size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); >>>>>> >>>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>>>>> index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 >>>>>> --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>>>>> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ >>>>>> * Adapted from coreboot. >>>>>> */ >>>>>> >>>>>> +#define DEBUG 1 >>>>>> #include <common.h> >>>>>> #include <clk.h> >>>>>> #include <dm.h> >>>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >>>>>> Trying to boot from SPI >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >>>>>> >>>>>> Model: Google Speedy >>>>>> DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 >>>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >>>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 >>>>>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >>>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >>>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 >>>>>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >>>>>> rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 >>>>>> SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 >>>>>> 4 GiB >>>>>> MMC: dwmmc at ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc at ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc at ff0f0000: 0 >>>>>> In: cros-ec-keyb >>>>>> Out: vidconsole >>>>>> Err: vidconsole >>>>>> Model: Google Speedy >>>>>> rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! >>>>>> Net: Net Initialization Skipped >>>>>> No ethernet found. >>>>>> Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 >>>>>> I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm >>>>>> mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 >>>>> >>>>> 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest >>>>> 32bit value ???plus one???). >>>>> >>>>>> bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would >>>>>> take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just >>>>>> rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info >>>>>> size member to a 64-bit container? >>>>> >>>>> The min() doesn???t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function >>>>> ???board_get_usable_ram_top??? just a few lines later??? >>>>> We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I???d rather hold off a >>>>> week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid >>>>> now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. >>>>> >>>>> I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in >>>>> ram_info is the culprit: it???s defined as ???size_t???, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ >>>>> which again is ???unsigned int??? on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. >>>> Yeah, I was talking about this with Marek on irc yesterday, I had the >>>> same conclusion. However, being very new and inexperienced with u-boot >>>> development in general, I'm a bit averse to to messing with what appears >>>> to be a global header file, as it can easily break any other board which >>>> uses it. >>> >>> No problem ??? let???s wait for Simon???s input and I???ll create the patchset. >>> I???ll need your help testing, as I don???t have any 32bit platforms w/ 4GB??? and I???ll >>> let you know once something is ready for you to test. >>> >> Even if we do change ram_info.size into a larger, 64-bit variable, we >> should still probably use that min call since with a 32-bit address >> space, even with 4GiB ram physically, the rk3288 can only address >> 0xff00000 of ram, which is just a tad shy of the full 4GiB. > > This is not the meaning of ram_info.size, though… for the addressability there’s > the ‘board_get_usable_ram_top’ hook used today. > > Unfortunately, there’s no formal definition (i.e. clear documentation of this in a header > file) of board_get_usable_ram_top; however, the default (weak) implementation in > board_f hints at the intent to use it to clip the end if the ’size’ field exceeds the > addressable space: > /* > * Detect whether we have so much RAM that it goes past the end of our > * 32-bit address space. If so, clip the usable RAM so it doesn't. > */ > > This is also consistent with usage on Tegra and a few others. > Until someone decides that ram_info should not hold the DRAM controller’s view, > but rather consider addressability by the CPU, I strongly disagree with applying > the carveout for the MMIO this early. > > Also note that just because this part of memory is not addressable from the CPUs > does not necessarily mean that it is not addressable from one of the DMA controllers > (I don’t know enough about the internal implementation of the address decode logic > in this SoC to determine whether that part of memory is really unaccessible or if it > is merely “special”). > >>>>> >>>>> Expanding this to a phys_size_t won???t be doing us much good, either (as >>>>> that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). >>>>> >>>>> The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ???usable RAM??? are >>>>> two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with >>>>> memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as >>>>> we???ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; >>>>> however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the >>>>> usable ram-top is evaluated??? so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow >>>>> the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a >>>>> lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions >>>>> to access peripheral space???in which case there might indeed be a usable >>>>> memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. >>>>> >>>>> From what I can tell, we???ll need to do two things: >>>>> (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types >>>>> for the memory size >>>>> (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ???size??? field in ram_info (it needs >>>>> to be larger than 32bits >>>>> >>>>> I???d like Simon???s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this >>>>> change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Philipp. >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> - Kever >>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> U-Boot mailing list >>>>>>>> U-Boot at lists.denx.de <mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de> >>>>>>>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot <https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot> > > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot at lists.denx.de > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-14 15:56 ` [U-Boot] " Dr. Philipp Tomsich (?) @ 2018-05-19 10:40 ` Marty E. Plummer 2018-05-19 12:08 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich -1 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-19 10:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 05:56:27PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > I had a bit more time to look into this and it looks as if we have two problem-spots... > > First, there's a type-mismatch between ram_info.size (a size_t) and gd.ram_size (phys_size_t). > While we can increase the size of a phys_size_t to 64bit (by defining CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT), > the size_t will always be an unsigned int on a 32bit arm architecture. So here's one possible > pitfall that should be resolved. > > Once this is adjusted, we might just increase the width of ram_info.size to 64bit by enabling > CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT ... however, this comes with a caveat: the default cell sizes for the > FDT (via fdtdec) also increases. I.e. if any come in our arch or the drivers still goes through > the fdtdec-functions, we'll end up with a problem. > > As my test coverage is limited to 64bit targets, I can't tell whether defining the PHYS_64BIT > configuration would be possible for the RK3288 -- if it is, we'd have a rather easy way forward > and could reuse the phys_size_t for ram_info.size. > > I'd appreciate if you could take a look at whether CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT gets us into a lot > of trouble on the RK3288 or whether this will trigger just a few minor adjustments... > > Thanks, > Philipp. So explain to me what you'd like me to do here, if you would. What I gather from this is you want me to flip CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT and see if it works or what? I can flash/reflash u-boot and coreboot pretty easily on the device, so I'm down for any sort of hardware testing needed to get this into a usable state. Regards, Marty. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-19 10:40 ` Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-19 12:08 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich 2018-07-06 3:11 ` Marty E. Plummer 0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-05-19 12:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Marty, > On 19 May 2018, at 12:40, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 05:56:27PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >> I had a bit more time to look into this and it looks as if we have two problem-spots... >> >> First, there's a type-mismatch between ram_info.size (a size_t) and gd.ram_size (phys_size_t). >> While we can increase the size of a phys_size_t to 64bit (by defining CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT), >> the size_t will always be an unsigned int on a 32bit arm architecture. So here's one possible >> pitfall that should be resolved. >> >> Once this is adjusted, we might just increase the width of ram_info.size to 64bit by enabling >> CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT ... however, this comes with a caveat: the default cell sizes for the >> FDT (via fdtdec) also increases. I.e. if any come in our arch or the drivers still goes through >> the fdtdec-functions, we'll end up with a problem. >> >> As my test coverage is limited to 64bit targets, I can't tell whether defining the PHYS_64BIT >> configuration would be possible for the RK3288 -- if it is, we'd have a rather easy way forward >> and could reuse the phys_size_t for ram_info.size. >> >> I'd appreciate if you could take a look at whether CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT gets us into a lot >> of trouble on the RK3288 or whether this will trigger just a few minor adjustments... >> >> Thanks, >> Philipp. > > So explain to me what you'd like me to do here, if you would. What I > gather from this is you want me to flip CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT and see if it > works or what? I can flash/reflash u-boot and coreboot pretty easily on > the device, so I'm down for any sort of hardware testing needed to get > this into a usable state. Yes, just enable PHYS_64BIT and report on how far it goes (activating some debug may be helpful to understand what goes wrong, if it fails). My gut feeling is that it could work, but there’s a number of pitfalls and we may not be lucky. Regards, Philipp. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-19 12:08 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-07-06 3:11 ` Marty E. Plummer 2018-07-24 8:07 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich 0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-07-06 3:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 02:08:53PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > Marty, > > > On 19 May 2018, at 12:40, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > > > So explain to me what you'd like me to do here, if you would. What I > > gather from this is you want me to flip CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT and see if it > > works or what? I can flash/reflash u-boot and coreboot pretty easily on > > the device, so I'm down for any sort of hardware testing needed to get > > this into a usable state. > > Yes, just enable PHYS_64BIT and report on how far it goes (activating some > debug may be helpful to understand what goes wrong, if it fails). > > My gut feeling is that it could work, but there’s a number of pitfalls and we may > not be lucky. > Testing flipping CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT, both with and without my 'clamping' patch to sdram_common.c, has the same results, in that all that is output on the servo console is that wierd <?> output. Where to from here, then? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-07-06 3:11 ` Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-07-24 8:07 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich 2018-07-25 16:28 ` Carlo Caione 0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-07-24 8:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Marty, > On 6 Jul 2018, at 05:11, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 02:08:53PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >> Marty, >> >>> On 19 May 2018, at 12:40, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> So explain to me what you'd like me to do here, if you would. What I >>> gather from this is you want me to flip CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT and see if it >>> works or what? I can flash/reflash u-boot and coreboot pretty easily on >>> the device, so I'm down for any sort of hardware testing needed to get >>> this into a usable state. >> >> Yes, just enable PHYS_64BIT and report on how far it goes (activating some >> debug may be helpful to understand what goes wrong, if it fails). >> >> My gut feeling is that it could work, but there’s a number of pitfalls and we may >> not be lucky. >> > Testing flipping CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT, both with and without my 'clamping' > patch to sdram_common.c, has the same results, in that all that is > output on the servo console is that wierd <?> output. Where to from > here, then? I have a patchset for changing the relevant fields in U-Boot to allow for 33bits (i.e. using u64) for the RAM size and it finally passes Travis cleanly. It will be another round or two of cleanup before I can submit the series — once this happens, I’ll copy you so you can give your Tested-by if it works… Thanks, Phil. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-07-24 8:07 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-07-25 16:28 ` Carlo Caione 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Carlo Caione @ 2018-07-25 16:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Tue, 2018-07-24 at 10:07 +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > > I have a patchset for changing the relevant fields in U-Boot to allow > for 33bits (i.e. using u64) for the RAM size and it finally passes > Travis cleanly. > It will be another round or two of cleanup before I can submit the > series — once this happens, I’ll copy you so you can give your > Tested-by if it works… I'm interested. Please put me in CC as well. -- Carlo Caione <carlo@endlessm.com> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-05-08 10:21 ` [U-Boot] " Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-07-10 14:41 ` Simon Glass -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Simon Glass @ 2018-07-10 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dr. Philipp Tomsich Cc: Vagrant Cascadian, U-Boot Mailing List, Marty E. Plummer, linux-rockchip Hi, On 8 May 2018 at 04:21, Dr. Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com> wrote: > Marty, > >> On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>> >>>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >>>>> Hi Marty, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c >>>>>> >>>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) >>>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. >>>>> >>>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. >>>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before >>>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 >>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >>>>>> #include <asm/io.h> >>>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> >>>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> >>>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >>>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> >>>>>> >>>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; >>>>>> u32 ch; >>>>>> >>>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); >>>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) >>>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); >>>>>> + if (!size_mb) { >>>>> >>>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, >>>>> isn't it? >>>>> I think don't need the changes before here. >>>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) >>>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out >>>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. >>>>>> + /* >>>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>>>>> + * so we reserve it >>>>>> + */ >>>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >>>>> >>>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use >>>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE >>>>> instead of hard code. >>>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, >>>> build and boot tested on my hardware. >>> >>> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb >>> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) >>> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. >>> >>> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what >>> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). >>> >> A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and >> sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >> index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ >> * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ >> */ >> >> +#define DEBUG 1 >> #include <common.h> >> #include <dm.h> >> #include <ram.h> >> @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; >> >> chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); >> + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); >> >> if (rank > 1) >> chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); >> if (row_3_4) >> chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; >> size_mb += chipsize_mb; >> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >> debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", >> rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); >> } >> >> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >> size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); >> >> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >> diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >> index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 >> --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >> +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ >> * Adapted from coreboot. >> */ >> >> +#define DEBUG 1 >> #include <common.h> >> #include <clk.h> >> #include <dm.h> >> >> --- >> U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >> Trying to boot from SPI >> >> >> U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >> >> Model: Google Speedy >> DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 >> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 >> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 >> SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 >> 4 GiB >> MMC: dwmmc@ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc@ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc@ff0f0000: 0 >> In: cros-ec-keyb >> Out: vidconsole >> Err: vidconsole >> Model: Google Speedy >> rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! >> Net: Net Initialization Skipped >> No ethernet found. >> Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 >> I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm >> mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 > > 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest > 32bit value “plus one”). > >> bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would >> take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just >> rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. >> >> Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info >> size member to a 64-bit container? > > The min() doesn’t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function > ‘board_get_usable_ram_top’ just a few lines later… > We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I’d rather hold off a > week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid > now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. > > I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in > ram_info is the culprit: it’s defined as ‘size_t’, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ > which again is ‘unsigned int’ on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. > > Expanding this to a phys_size_t won’t be doing us much good, either (as > that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). > > The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ‘usable RAM’ are > two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with > memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as > we’ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; > however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the > usable ram-top is evaluated… so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow > the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a > lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions > to access peripheral space—in which case there might indeed be a usable > memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. > > From what I can tell, we’ll need to do two things: > (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types > for the memory size > (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ‘size’ field in ram_info (it needs > to be larger than 32bits > > I’d like Simon’s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this > change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. Sorry I missed this. Yes changing ram.h is fine with me. In fact I thought that size_t would be OK. Clearly not. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size @ 2018-07-10 14:41 ` Simon Glass 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Simon Glass @ 2018-07-10 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi, On 8 May 2018 at 04:21, Dr. Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com> wrote: > Marty, > >> On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>> >>>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >>>>> Hi Marty, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c >>>>>> >>>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) >>>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. >>>>> >>>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. >>>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before >>>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 >>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >>>>>> #include <asm/io.h> >>>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> >>>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> >>>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >>>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> >>>>>> >>>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; >>>>>> u32 ch; >>>>>> >>>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); >>>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) >>>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); >>>>>> + if (!size_mb) { >>>>> >>>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, >>>>> isn't it? >>>>> I think don't need the changes before here. >>>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) >>>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out >>>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. >>>>>> + /* >>>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>>>>> + * so we reserve it >>>>>> + */ >>>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >>>>> >>>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use >>>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE >>>>> instead of hard code. >>>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, >>>> build and boot tested on my hardware. >>> >>> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb >>> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) >>> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. >>> >>> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what >>> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). >>> >> A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and >> sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >> index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ >> * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ >> */ >> >> +#define DEBUG 1 >> #include <common.h> >> #include <dm.h> >> #include <ram.h> >> @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; >> >> chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); >> + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); >> >> if (rank > 1) >> chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); >> if (row_3_4) >> chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; >> size_mb += chipsize_mb; >> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >> debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", >> rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); >> } >> >> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >> size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); >> >> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >> diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >> index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 >> --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >> +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ >> * Adapted from coreboot. >> */ >> >> +#define DEBUG 1 >> #include <common.h> >> #include <clk.h> >> #include <dm.h> >> >> --- >> U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >> Trying to boot from SPI >> >> >> U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >> >> Model: Google Speedy >> DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 >> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 >> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >> rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 >> SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 >> 4 GiB >> MMC: dwmmc at ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc at ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc at ff0f0000: 0 >> In: cros-ec-keyb >> Out: vidconsole >> Err: vidconsole >> Model: Google Speedy >> rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! >> Net: Net Initialization Skipped >> No ethernet found. >> Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 >> I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm >> mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 > > 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest > 32bit value “plus one”). > >> bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would >> take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just >> rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. >> >> Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info >> size member to a 64-bit container? > > The min() doesn’t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function > ‘board_get_usable_ram_top’ just a few lines later… > We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I’d rather hold off a > week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid > now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. > > I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in > ram_info is the culprit: it’s defined as ‘size_t’, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ > which again is ‘unsigned int’ on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. > > Expanding this to a phys_size_t won’t be doing us much good, either (as > that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). > > The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ‘usable RAM’ are > two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with > memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as > we’ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; > however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the > usable ram-top is evaluated… so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow > the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a > lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions > to access peripheral space—in which case there might indeed be a usable > memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. > > From what I can tell, we’ll need to do two things: > (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types > for the memory size > (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ‘size’ field in ram_info (it needs > to be larger than 32bits > > I’d like Simon’s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this > change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. Sorry I missed this. Yes changing ram.h is fine with me. In fact I thought that size_t would be OK. Clearly not. Regards, Simon ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size 2018-07-10 14:41 ` [U-Boot] " Simon Glass @ 2018-07-10 18:55 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-07-10 18:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Simon Glass Cc: Vagrant Cascadian, U-Boot Mailing List, Marty E. Plummer, linux-rockchip > On 10 Jul 2018, at 16:41, Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 8 May 2018 at 04:21, Dr. Philipp Tomsich > <philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com <mailto:philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com>> wrote: >> Marty, >> >>> On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >>>>>> Hi Marty, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>>>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) >>>>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. >>>>>> >>>>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. >>>>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before >>>>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 >>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >>>>>>> #include <asm/io.h> >>>>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> >>>>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> >>>>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >>>>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>>>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; >>>>>>> u32 ch; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); >>>>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) >>>>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); >>>>>>> + if (!size_mb) { >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, >>>>>> isn't it? >>>>>> I think don't need the changes before here. >>>>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) >>>>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out >>>>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. >>>>>>> + /* >>>>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>>>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>>>>>> + * so we reserve it >>>>>>> + */ >>>>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >>>>>> >>>>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use >>>>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE >>>>>> instead of hard code. >>>>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, >>>>> build and boot tested on my hardware. >>>> >>>> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb >>>> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) >>>> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. >>>> >>>> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what >>>> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). >>>> >>> A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and >>> sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ >>> * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ >>> */ >>> >>> +#define DEBUG 1 >>> #include <common.h> >>> #include <dm.h> >>> #include <ram.h> >>> @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; >>> >>> chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); >>> + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); >>> >>> if (rank > 1) >>> chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); >>> if (row_3_4) >>> chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; >>> size_mb += chipsize_mb; >>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >>> debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", >>> rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); >>> } >>> >>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >>> size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); >>> >>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>> diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>> index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>> +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ >>> * Adapted from coreboot. >>> */ >>> >>> +#define DEBUG 1 >>> #include <common.h> >>> #include <clk.h> >>> #include <dm.h> >>> >>> --- >>> U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >>> Trying to boot from SPI >>> >>> >>> U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >>> >>> Model: Google Speedy >>> DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 >>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 >>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 >>> SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 >>> 4 GiB >>> MMC: dwmmc@ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc@ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc@ff0f0000: 0 >>> In: cros-ec-keyb >>> Out: vidconsole >>> Err: vidconsole >>> Model: Google Speedy >>> rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! >>> Net: Net Initialization Skipped >>> No ethernet found. >>> Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 >>> I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm >>> mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 >> >> 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest >> 32bit value “plus one”). >> >>> bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would >>> take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just >>> rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. >>> >>> Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info >>> size member to a 64-bit container? >> >> The min() doesn’t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function >> ‘board_get_usable_ram_top’ just a few lines later… >> We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I’d rather hold off a >> week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid >> now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. >> >> I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in >> ram_info is the culprit: it’s defined as ‘size_t’, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ >> which again is ‘unsigned int’ on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. >> >> Expanding this to a phys_size_t won’t be doing us much good, either (as >> that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). >> >> The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ‘usable RAM’ are >> two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with >> memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as >> we’ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; >> however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the >> usable ram-top is evaluated… so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow >> the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a >> lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions >> to access peripheral space—in which case there might indeed be a usable >> memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. >> >> From what I can tell, we’ll need to do two things: >> (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types >> for the memory size >> (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ‘size’ field in ram_info (it needs >> to be larger than 32bits >> >> I’d like Simon’s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this >> change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. > > Sorry I missed this. Yes changing ram.h is fine with me. In fact I > thought that size_t would be OK. Clearly not. Ok, I’ll try to get this done over the next few days. > Regards, > Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size @ 2018-07-10 18:55 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich 0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Dr. Philipp Tomsich @ 2018-07-10 18:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot > On 10 Jul 2018, at 16:41, Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 8 May 2018 at 04:21, Dr. Philipp Tomsich > <philipp.tomsich at theobroma-systems.com <mailto:philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com>> wrote: >> Marty, >> >>> On 8 May 2018, at 02:52, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 7 May 2018, at 04:34, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:20:55AM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >>>>>> Hi Marty, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 05/06/2018 10:25 PM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >>>>>>> Taken from coreboot's src/soc/rockchip/rk3288/sdram.c >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Without this change, my u-boot build for the asus c201 chromebook (4GiB) >>>>>>> is incorrectly detected as 0 Bytes of ram. >>>>>> >>>>>> I know the root cause for this issue, and I have a local patch for it. >>>>>> The rk3288 is 32bit, and 4GB size is just out of range, so we need to before >>>>>> the max size before return with '<<20'. Sorry for forgot to send it out. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@startmail.com> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>> index 76dbdc8715..a9c9f970a4 100644 >>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>>>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ >>>>>>> #include <asm/io.h> >>>>>>> #include <asm/arch/sdram_common.h> >>>>>>> #include <dm/uclass-internal.h> >>>>>>> +#include <linux/kernel.h> >>>>>>> +#include <linux/sizes.h> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>>>>>> size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>>> @@ -19,34 +21,44 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>>>>>> size_t size_mb = 0; >>>>>>> u32 ch; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - u32 sys_reg = readl(reg); >>>>>>> - u32 ch_num = 1 + ((sys_reg >> SYS_REG_NUM_CH_SHIFT) >>>>>>> - & SYS_REG_NUM_CH_MASK); >>>>>>> + if (!size_mb) { >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't understand this and follow up changes, we don't really need it, >>>>>> isn't it? >>>>>> I think don't need the changes before here. >>>>> Yeah, that was just another level of indentation for the if (!size_mb) >>>>> guard, but I've reworked the patch to not do that as it was pointed out >>>>> that since size_mb is initialized to 0 prior. >>>>>>> + /* >>>>>>> + * we use the 0x00000000~0xfeffffff space >>>>>>> + * since 0xff000000~0xffffffff is soc register space >>>>>>> + * so we reserve it >>>>>>> + */ >>>>>>> + size_mb = min(size_mb, 0xff000000/SZ_1M); >>>>>> >>>>>> This is what we really need, as Klaus point out, we need to use >>>>>> SDRAM_MAX_SIZE >>>>>> instead of hard code. >>>>> Yeah, I've got a rework on that which uses SDRAM_MAX_SIZE as instructed, >>>>> build and boot tested on my hardware. >>>> >>>> In that case you just masked the problem but didn???t solve it: assuming size_mb >>>> is size_t (I???ll assume this is 64bit, but did not check), then your 4GB is 0x1_0000_0000 ) >>>> which overflows to 0x0 when converted to a u32. >>>> >>>> In other words: we need to figure out where the truncation occurs (image what >>>> happens if a new 32bit processor with LPAE comes out???). >>>> >>> A very valid point. With the following patch to sdram_common.c and >>> sdram_rk3288.c applied I get the debug output that follows it: >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> index 232a7fa655..0fe69bf558 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c >>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ >>> * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ >>> */ >>> >>> +#define DEBUG 1 >>> #include <common.h> >>> #include <dm.h> >>> #include <ram.h> >>> @@ -39,16 +40,19 @@ size_t rockchip_sdram_size(phys_addr_t reg) >>> SYS_REG_ROW_3_4_MASK; >>> >>> chipsize_mb = (1 << (cs0_row + col + bk + bw - 20)); >>> + debug("%s: %d: chipsize_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, chipsize_mb); >>> >>> if (rank > 1) >>> chipsize_mb += chipsize_mb >> (cs0_row - cs1_row); >>> if (row_3_4) >>> chipsize_mb = chipsize_mb * 3 / 4; >>> size_mb += chipsize_mb; >>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >>> debug("rank %d col %d bk %d cs0_row %d bw %d row_3_4 %d\n", >>> rank, col, bk, cs0_row, bw, row_3_4); >>> } >>> >>> + debug("%s: %d: size_mb %x\n", __func__, __LINE__, size_mb); >>> size_mb = min(size_mb, SDRAM_MAX_SIZE/SZ_1M); >>> >>> return (size_t)size_mb << 20; >>> diff --git a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>> index d99bf12476..9738eb088f 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>> +++ b/drivers/ram/rockchip/sdram_rk3288.c >>> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ >>> * Adapted from coreboot. >>> */ >>> >>> +#define DEBUG 1 >>> #include <common.h> >>> #include <clk.h> >>> #include <dm.h> >>> >>> --- >>> U-Boot SPL 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >>> Trying to boot from SPI >>> >>> >>> U-Boot 2018.05-rc3-02370-g309384e84b-dirty (May 07 2018 - 19:42:15 -0500) >>> >>> Model: Google Speedy >>> DRAM: rockchip_sdram_size ff73009c 3c50dc50 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 800 >>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 42: chipsize_mb 400 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 49: size_mb 1000 >>> rank 2 col 11 bk 3 cs0_row 14 bw 2 row_3_4 0 >>> rockchip_sdram_size: 54: size_mb 1000 >>> SDRAM base=0, size=fe000000 >>> 4 GiB >>> MMC: dwmmc at ff0c0000: 1, dwmmc at ff0d0000: 2, dwmmc at ff0f0000: 0 >>> In: cros-ec-keyb >>> Out: vidconsole >>> Err: vidconsole >>> Model: Google Speedy >>> rockchip_dnl_key_pressed: adc_channel_single_shot fail! >>> Net: Net Initialization Skipped >>> No ethernet found. >>> Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 >>> I guess we need to change the size_t to something larger; unless I'm >>> mistaken, that's a 32 bit value, right? and 0x100000000 is at least 40 >> >> 4GB is actually the 33rd bit set and the lower 32bits cleared (i.e. the largest >> 32bit value “plus one”). >> >>> bits, unless I'm missing the issue here somewhere. However, that would >>> take a change to include/ram.h, and would impact far more than just >>> rk3288/rockchip devices across the board, so I'm unsure how to proceed. >>> >>> Use the min macro here for now, and begin work migrating the ram_info >>> size member to a 64-bit container? >> >> The min() doesn’t make any sense here, as we implement the hook function >> ‘board_get_usable_ram_top’ just a few lines later… >> We are at the start of the merge window right now, so I’d rather hold off a >> week (or two) and have a permanent solution than merging just a band-aid >> now and then having the full fix come in later during the merge window. >> >> I briefly reviewed the situation yesterday and it looks like the size field in >> ram_info is the culprit: it’s defined as ‘size_t’, which again is __SIZE_TYPE__ >> which again is ‘unsigned int’ on a (32bit) arm-*-eabi compiler. >> >> Expanding this to a phys_size_t won’t be doing us much good, either (as >> that one will also be 32bits for the RK3288). >> >> The root cause of this is really that the RAM size and the ‘usable RAM’ are >> two different concepts in U-Boot. On a 32bit physical address space with >> memory-mapped peripherals, we can never have the full 4GB of DRAM as >> we’ll also have some of the physical address-space set aside for the MMIO; >> however, the MMIO range is only removed from the DRAM size when the >> usable ram-top is evaluated… so the size can be 4GB after all and overflow >> the 32bit size_t. Note that this separation into two different steps makes a >> lot of sense, as processors might not use MMIO but specialised instructions >> to access peripheral space—in which case there might indeed be a usable >> memory of 4GB on a 32bit physical address space. >> >> From what I can tell, we’ll need to do two things: >> (a) fix arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c to not use 32bit types >> for the memory size >> (b) touch ram.h to change the type of the ‘size’ field in ram_info (it needs >> to be larger than 32bits >> >> I’d like Simon’s input (as he owns ram.h) and can create a patchset for this >> change, if he agrees that this is the way forward. > > Sorry I missed this. Yes changing ram.h is fine with me. In fact I > thought that size_t would be OK. Clearly not. Ok, I’ll try to get this done over the next few days. > Regards, > Simon ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/3] add support for the asus C201 chromebook (4GiB) 2018-05-06 14:25 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer (?) (?) @ 2018-05-07 0:32 ` Marty E. Plummer -1 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread From: Marty E. Plummer @ 2018-05-07 0:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 09:25:10AM -0500, Marty E. Plummer wrote: > Build and boot tested on my chromebook, which was generously altered by > Simon Glass to have a servo header and also generously provided a servo > board itself to do debugging with. > > It ''works'', but has a few oddities. I can't seem to get it to see my > external sdcard or a usb flash drive, so I've been having to ymodem my > kernel, fdt, and initramfs over to test booting (which does work). The > screen is a bit inconsistent on whether or not it activates any given > power cycle, but when it does work, it works right. > > The changes to sdram_common.c were taken from coreboot, as it has > otherwise identical code (minus the if (!size_mb) block), and actually > works on my hardware. > Oh, and one other thing: unless I revert commit c3c0331db1fb7b1f4ff41e144fc04353b37c785c, I do not get any output on the debug uart, but I didn't want to send a revert commit without discussion, even more so than the the other stuff I'm providing. That being said, can anyone else with a rockchip device using u-boot give current u-boot master a try and see if I'm the only one not getting console output after that commit? > Marty E. Plummer (3): > sf: Add GigaDevice gd25q32b entry > rockchip: add support for veyron-speedy (ASUS Chromebook C201) > rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size > > arch/arm/dts/Makefile | 1 + > arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts | 189 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board-spl.c | 3 +- > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288/Kconfig | 11 ++ > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/sdram_common.c | 62 ++++--- > board/google/veyron/Kconfig | 16 ++ > configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig | 96 +++++++++++ > drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c | 1 + > 8 files changed, 353 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 arch/arm/dts/rk3288-veyron-speedy.dts > create mode 100644 configs/chromebook_speedy_defconfig > > -- > 2.17.0 > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-07-25 16:28 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2018-05-06 14:25 [PATCH 0/3] add support for the asus C201 chromebook (4GiB) Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-06 14:25 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer
[not found] ` <20180506142513.19911-1-hanetzer-zVALfsKDk1AS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org>
2018-05-06 14:25 ` [PATCH 1/3] sf: Add GigaDevice gd25q32b entry Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-06 14:25 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-09 8:57 ` [U-Boot,1/3] " Philipp Tomsich
2018-05-09 8:57 ` [U-Boot] " Philipp Tomsich
2018-05-06 14:25 ` [PATCH 2/3] rockchip: add support for veyron-speedy (ASUS Chromebook C201) Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-06 14:25 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-06 22:12 ` klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com
2018-05-07 0:20 ` Marty E. Plummer
2018-07-13 10:31 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-07-24 5:12 ` Marty E. Plummer
2018-07-24 8:05 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-05-06 14:25 ` [PATCH 3/3] rockchip: fix incorrect detection of ram size Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-06 14:25 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-06 18:39 ` klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com
2018-05-06 19:08 ` Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-06 20:03 ` Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-06 20:21 ` klaus.goger at theobroma-systems.com
2018-05-06 20:41 ` Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-06 22:19 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-05-06 22:19 ` [U-Boot] " Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-05-07 0:25 ` Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-07 0:25 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-07 2:20 ` Kever Yang
2018-05-07 2:20 ` [U-Boot] " Kever Yang
2018-05-07 2:34 ` Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-07 2:34 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-07 9:16 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-05-07 9:16 ` [U-Boot] " Dr. Philipp Tomsich
[not found] ` <791299C0-EEC0-4DB1-97C4-A8DAD3B1A481-SN7IsUiht6C/RdPyistoZJqQE7yCjDx5@public.gmane.org>
2018-05-08 0:52 ` Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-08 0:52 ` Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-08 10:21 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-05-08 10:21 ` [U-Boot] " Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-05-08 10:23 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-05-08 10:23 ` [U-Boot] " Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-05-08 19:21 ` Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-08 19:21 ` [U-Boot] " Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-08 21:08 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-05-08 21:08 ` [U-Boot] " Dr. Philipp Tomsich
[not found] ` <C5B7DFAE-C5CA-4D9E-B6CB-C44E9AD974E9-SN7IsUiht6C/RdPyistoZJqQE7yCjDx5@public.gmane.org>
2018-05-09 5:29 ` Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-09 5:29 ` Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-09 7:24 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-05-09 7:24 ` [U-Boot] " Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-05-14 15:56 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-05-14 15:56 ` [U-Boot] " Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-05-19 10:40 ` Marty E. Plummer
2018-05-19 12:08 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-07-06 3:11 ` Marty E. Plummer
2018-07-24 8:07 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-07-25 16:28 ` Carlo Caione
2018-07-10 14:41 ` Simon Glass
2018-07-10 14:41 ` [U-Boot] " Simon Glass
2018-07-10 18:55 ` Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-07-10 18:55 ` [U-Boot] " Dr. Philipp Tomsich
2018-05-07 0:32 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/3] add support for the asus C201 chromebook (4GiB) Marty E. Plummer
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.