Until the last SoC, the register addresses have been hard-coded because
they are always constant. For a planned new SoC, the register bases
will be completely changed. I insist on supporting multiple SoCs/boards
by a single defconfig (uniphier_v8_defconfig) since duplicating similar
defconfig files is a maintenance burden. The base addresses must be
fixed-up at run-time somehow.
Previously, the board init code identified the SoC by reading out the
SG_REVISION register. This is much easier than parsing DT.
You cannot do it any more because the base address of SG will be
changed. The SG_REVISION register exists to read out the SoC ID, but
you never know its address before identifying the SoC. Oh well.
So, the possible solution is to parse the DT, and find out the node
with "*-soc-glue" compatible string. Then, sg_base is set to the value
of the "reg" property. The sc_base is set up likewise.
It is worth noting a pit-fall. Having sc_base and sg_base in the global
scope will make the life easier, but the global variables are poorly
supported before the relocation. In fact, the .bss section overwraps
with DT. Allocating them in the .bss section would break DT. So, I gave
dummy initializers to assign them in the .data section.
Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
When U-Boot started using SPDX tags we were among the early adopters and
there weren't a lot of other examples to borrow from. So we picked the
area of the file that usually had a full license text and replaced it
with an appropriate SPDX-License-Identifier: entry. Since then, the
Linux Kernel has adopted SPDX tags and they place it as the very first
line in a file (except where shebangs are used, then it's second line)
and with slightly different comment styles than us.
In part due to community overlap, in part due to better tag visibility
and in part for other minor reasons, switch over to that style.
This commit changes all instances where we have a single declared
license in the tag as both the before and after are identical in tag
contents. There's also a few places where I found we did not have a tag
and have introduced one.
Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
As is often the case with SoC development, slightly different
products (i.e. different part number) are developed based on the
same silicon-die. Such fine grained information is unmaintainable.
Also, "SoC:" is a better fit that "CPU:".
Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
Currently, uniphier_get_soc_type() converts the SoC ID (this is
read from the revision register) to an enum symbol to use it for SoC
identification. Come to think of it, there is no need for the
conversion in the first place. Using the SoC ID from the register
as-is a straightforward way.
Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
