Re: iMX ddrphy_utils difference with U-boot

Hi Ahmad,

Thank you for your quick reply.

On 08.06.26 19:26, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> Hello Andrei,
> 
> On 6/8/26 16:24, Andrei Lalaev wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am moving an iMX8MP module from vendor U-Boot 2024.04 to Barebox 2025.02
> 
> Sidenote: You'll probably want to use one of the still supported
> v2026.04 or v2026.06 releases.
> 

That's our plan for the near future :)


>> and found a strange difference in the DDR training code:
>>
>>   vim drivers/ddr/imx/ddrphy_utils.c +94
>>
>> And the corresponding line in U-Boot:
>>
>>   vim drivers/ddr/imx/phy/ddrphy_utils.c +101
>>
>> Is there any chance that somebody knows/remembers why "return -1" was replaced with "hang()"?
> 
> I can't speak for Sascha, but having looked at the code, I see no reason
> why not to propagate the error.
> 
>> I couldn't find any explanation in the commits/mailing lists.
> 
> My guess is that it wasn't anticipated that boards would handle
> the error gracefully to fall back to a different DDR init.
> 

In our case this is the only option, because we may have 2 and 4 GB modules.
So, if the 4 GB timings don't apply, we fall back to the 2 GB timings.


> Cheers,
> Ahmad


-- 
Best regards,
Andrei Lalaev