[PATCH 2/3] ARM: PRIMA2: make mach-prima2 common for all SiRF series SoC

[Barry Song]

2012/8/21 Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de>:
> On Monday 20 August 2012, Barry Song wrote:
>> From: Barry Song <Baohua.Song at csr.com>
>>
>> We will have SiRF Marco and Polo, so rename the dir to mach-sirf
>> and add Kconfig menu
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Baohua Song <Baohua.Song at csr.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm/Kconfig                                   |   10 +++++-----
>>  arch/arm/Makefile                                  |    2 +-
>>  arch/arm/mach-sirf/Kconfig                         |   16 ++++++++++++++++
>>  arch/arm/{mach-prima2 => mach-sirf}/Makefile       |    0
>>  arch/arm/{mach-prima2 => mach-sirf}/Makefile.boot  |    0
>>  .../arm/{mach-prima2 => mach-sirf}/board-generic.c |    0
>>  arch/arm/{mach-prima2 => mach-sirf}/common.h       |    0
>>  .../include/mach/clkdev.h                          |    0
>>  .../include/mach/debug-macro.S                     |    0
>>  .../include/mach/entry-macro.S                     |    0
>>  .../{mach-prima2 => mach-sirf}/include/mach/gpio.h |    0
>>  .../include/mach/hardware.h                        |    0
>>  .../{mach-prima2 => mach-sirf}/include/mach/irqs.h |    0
>>  .../{mach-prima2 => mach-sirf}/include/mach/map.h  |    0
>
> I'm not sure if we should rename all of these right now. I've been thinking
> about moving all of recent and simple ARMv7 based platforms (socfpga, zynq,
> prima2, ...) into a single directory, where they would basically end up
> being one file per platform. We should discuss this at the ARM mini summit,
> and I can let you know the outcome of it. I don't object on the rename in
> principle, but it might end up causing extra churn.

ok. i will follow the output of  ARM mini summit.

>
>> +if ARCH_SIRF
>> +
>> +choice
>> +       prompt "Qualcomm SiRF SoC Type"
>> +       default ARCH_PRIMA2
>
> I'm curious about this: I did read that Samsung acquired CSR, and
> you list the chips as Qualcomm. What's the story here?

sorry. this is typo.
prompt "Qualcomm SiRF SoC Type"
->
prompt "CSR SiRF SoC Type"

>
>> +config ARCH_PRIMA2
>> +       bool "CSR SiRFSoC PRIMA2 ARM Cortex A9 Platform"
>> +       select CPU_V7
>> +       select ZONE_DMA
>> +       help
>> +          Support for CSR SiRFSoC ARM Cortex A9 Platform
>> +
>> +endchoice
>
> Is this still needed? When you add other SoC type here, would you
> build kernels that are for just one of them in practice?  If they
> are completely generic anyway, you can skip the submenu.
>

for the moment, that is needed just because the DEBUG UART base
address is difficult for different SoC. debug-macro.S is very early,
it depends on the SIRFSOC_UART1_PA_BASE.

 /* UART-1: used as serial debug port */
 #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_PRIMA2
#define SIRFSOC_UART1_PA_BASE          0xb0060000
 #elif defined(CONFIG_ARCH_MARCO)
#define SIRFSOC_UART1_PA_BASE          0xcc060000
#endif
otherwise, PRIMA2 and MARCO can co-exist.

i think i can find some ways to set the rp dynamically according to chip type.
         .macro  addruart, rp, rv, tmp
         ldr     \rp, =SIRFSOC_UART1_PA_BASE             @ physical
         ldr     \rv, =SIRFSOC_UART1_VA_BASE             @ virtual
         .endm


>         Arnd
>

-barry