powerpc/85xx: p2020rdb - move the NAND address.

[Kumar Gala]

On Mar 30, 2012, at 9:04 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:

> On 03/29/2012 03:10 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
> 
>>> - include/configs/P1_P2_RDB.h
>>> 
>>> #ifndef CONFIG_NAND_SPL
>>> #define CONFIG_SYS_NAND_BASE            0xffa00000
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT
>>> #define CONFIG_SYS_NAND_BASE_PHYS       0xfffa00000ull
>>> #else
>>> #define CONFIG_SYS_NAND_BASE_PHYS       CONFIG_SYS_NAND_BASE
>>> #endif
>>> #else
>>> #define CONFIG_SYS_NAND_BASE            0xfff00000
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT
>>> #define CONFIG_SYS_NAND_BASE_PHYS       0xffff00000ull
>>> #else
>>> #define CONFIG_SYS_NAND_BASE_PHYS       CONFIG_SYS_NAND_BASE
>>> #endif
>>> #endif
>>> 
>>> - include/configs/p1_p2_rdb_pc.h
>>> 
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_NAND_FSL_ELBC
>>> #define CONFIG_SYS_NAND_BASE            0xff800000
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_PHYS_64BIT
>>> #define CONFIG_SYS_NAND_BASE_PHYS       0xfff800000ull
>>> #else
>>> #define CONFIG_SYS_NAND_BASE_PHYS       CONFIG_SYS_NAND_BASE
>>> #endif
>>> 
>> 
>> There are two (well 3 since rdb-pc has both 32b&  36b) in the tree now:
>> 
>> arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p2020rdb.dts
>> arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p2020rdb-pc_32b.dts
>> arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p2020rdb-pc_36b.dts
> 
> Okay. So I assume that one has the proper NAND address and my patch
> should be reverted then. Do want a patch from me for that?

Yes, please do.

>>> Since both system have the same SoC and the NAND_SPL is always linked
>>> against 0xfff00000 I don't see anything wrong to relocate the NAND CS
>>> later to 0xff800000 (or to 0xffa00000) and having it consistent among
>>> both configs.
> 
> what about this thing? Should leave it as it or move to the same
> location? Since I have no HW *I* would prefer not to touch it :)

Hmm, that implies a u-boot change, right?

- k