Re: [PATCH v4 01/14] ARM: mvebu: add Netgear RN102 support
"Sascha Hauer" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.infradead.lists.barebox |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 2026-08-20 16:27, Luca Lauro wrote: > Hi Sascha, > > about the NAND node: the upstream DTS does contain the NAND configuration > properties, but they are placed inside the `nand@0` child node. Barebox > pxa3xx-nand reads these properties from the controller node instead, so > the upstream layout is not sufficient for barebox to probe and configure > the NAND controller correctly. > > For this reason the overlay needs to replicate NAND configuration > properties in the controller node. Without them, barebox does not apply > settings and NAND doesn't work. > > The only part that is truly duplicated is `status = "okay"`, which I can > drop in v5. > > Thanks for the review. > > Il giorno lun 17 ago 2026 alle ore 09:51 Sascha Hauer < > [email protected]> ha scritto: > > > On 2026-08-13 17:26, Luca Lauro via B4 Relay wrote: > > > + filetype_kwbimage_v1); > > > + > > > + return 0; > > > +} > > > + > > > +static const struct of_device_id rn102_of_match[] = { > > > + { .compatible = "netgear,rn102" }, > > > > How is the driver probed? The string "netgear,rn102" is in no dts. > > Unless I am missing something this should be "netgear,readynas-102". > > > > Same for the rn104 patch. > > > > > +/* > > > + * NOTE: > > > + * armada_370_xp_barebox_entry() cannot be used here because the > > > + * upstream SDRAM size detection for Armada 370-XP misinterprets > > > + * the DDR_SIZE_CSn registers on this board and reports an incorrect > > > + * memory size (256MB instead of 512MB on RN102). > > > + * > > > + * Until the generic detection code is fixed, we compute the SDRAM > > > + * size manually using the DDR_SIZE_CSn values. > > > + */ > > > +static unsigned long armada_370_xp_memory_find(void) > > > +{ > > > + unsigned long mem_size = 0; > > > + > > > + for (int cs = 0; cs < 4; cs++) { > > > + u32 ctrl = readl(ARMADA_370_XP_SDRAM_BASE + > > DDR_SIZE_CSn(cs)); > > > + > > > + /* Skip non-enabled CS */ > > > + if ((ctrl & DDR_SIZE_ENABLED) != DDR_SIZE_ENABLED) > > > + continue; > > > + > > > + mem_size += (ctrl | ~DDR_SIZE_MASK) + 1; > > > + } > > > + > > > + return mem_size; > > > +} > > > > The only difference I can spot here between this function and the > > existing variant in arch/arm/mach-mvebu/common.c is: > > > > #define DDR_SIZE_MASK 0xff000000 > > > > whereas the common.c variant uses: > > > > #define ARMADA_370_XP_DDR_SIZE_MASK 0xffff0000 > > > > The latter goes down to this: > > > > > commit 7351b6b5c59c7a280787998006f39a5cd3a2f18b > > > Author: Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]> > > > Date: Tue Jun 13 00:37:49 2017 +0200 > > > > > > ARM: mvebu: fix size mask for RAM window > > > > > > The size field in the window control register occupies bits 31:16. So > > > adapt ARMADA_370_XP_DDR_SIZE_MASK accordingly. This fixes detection > > of > > > RAM chips smaller than 32 MiB and so probably doesn't affect any > > > supported machine. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]> > > > Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <[email protected]> > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/common.c b/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/common.c > > > index 06bfb72615..fa971da11e 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/common.c > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/common.c > > > @@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ > > > #define ARMADA_370_XP_SDRAM_BASE (IOMEM(MVEBU_REMAP_INT_REG_BASE) > > + 0x20000) > > > #define ARMADA_370_XP_DDR_SIZE_CSn(n) (0x184 + ((n) * 0x8)) > > > #define ARMADA_370_XP_DDR_SIZE_ENABLED BIT(0) > > > -#define ARMADA_370_XP_DDR_SIZE_MASK 0xff000000 > > > +#define ARMADA_370_XP_DDR_SIZE_MASK 0xffff0000 > > > > > > /* > > > * Marvell MVEBU SoC id and revision can be read from any PCIe > > > > @Uwe, Where did you get that information from. Could it be that we > > should just revert this one given that it seems to be untested on your > > side? > > > > > + > > > +&nand_controller { > > > + compatible = "marvell,armada370-nand", "marvell,pxa3xx-nand"; > > > + status = "okay"; > > > > These two properties are already in the upstream dts files, please drop. Could you retry on current -next? It contains fac937411f mtd: nand: nand_mrvl_nfc: support the nand-controller bindings which seems to fix that issue. At least that fixed the binding on my pxa3xx board. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |