[meta-xilinx] Wrong DRAM set for custom board using FSBL + u-boot?
Manjukumar Harthikote Matha
MANJUKUM at xilinx.com
Fri Dec 8 09:03:04 PST 2017
> -----Original Message-----
> From: meta-xilinx-bounces at yoctoproject.org [mailto:meta-xilinx-
> bounces at yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Giordon Stark
> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2017 10:26 PM
> To: Mike Looijmans <mike.looijmans at topic.nl>
> Cc: Tang, Shaochun <stang at bnl.gov>; meta-xilinx at yoctoproject.org
> Subject: Re: [meta-xilinx] Wrong DRAM set for custom board using FSBL + u-boot?
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> Is that part of the defconfig or am I looking somewhere else for this? I suppose
> you're not talking about the BOOTARGS here...
>
Compile the u-boot against the dtb using EXT_DTB
Thanks,
Manju
> Giordon
>
> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 12:08 AM Mike Looijmans <mike.looijmans at topic.nl
> <mailto:mike.looijmans at topic.nl> > wrote:
>
>
> Change looks okay, but you (may also) need to apply this to the bootloader.
> u-boot passes the memory size on to the kernel, and the kernel just follows
> what u-boot reports.
>
> On 07-12-17 21:35, Giordon Stark wrote:
> > Thanks a lot for the explanation Nathan (and all).
> >
> > When I implement the change (see diff):
> >
> > diff --git a/conf/machine/boards/gfex/prototype3/system-top.dts
> > b/conf/machine/boards/gfex/prototype3/system-top.dts
> > index 4e8ee15..e823bb8 100755
> > --- a/conf/machine/boards/gfex/prototype3/system-top.dts
> > +++ b/conf/machine/boards/gfex/prototype3/system-top.dts
> > @@ -26,6 +26,6 @@
> > };
> > memory {
> > device_type = "memory";
> > - reg = <0x0 0x0 0x0 0x80000000>, <0x00000008 0x00000000 0x0
> > 0x80000000>;
> > + reg = <0x0 0x0 0x0 0x80000000>, <0x00000008 0x00000000
> > 0x00000003 0x80000000>;
> > };
> > };
> >
> > re-run bitbake, and re-program the board -- we still see 4 GiB DRAM. Any
> ideas?
> >
> > Giordon
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 8:49 PM Nathan Rossi <nathan at nathanrossi.com
> <mailto:nathan at nathanrossi.com>
> > <mailto:nathan at nathanrossi.com <mailto:nathan at nathanrossi.com> >>
> wrote:
> >
> > On 7 December 2017 at 11:37, Giordon Stark <kratsg at gmail.com
> <mailto:kratsg at gmail.com>
> > <mailto:kratsg at gmail.com <mailto:kratsg at gmail.com> >> wrote:
> > > Hi Alistair,
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 7:23 PM Alistair Francis
> <alistair23 at gmail.com <mailto:alistair23 at gmail.com>
> > <mailto:alistair23 at gmail.com <mailto:alistair23 at gmail.com> >>
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 4:45 PM, Giordon Stark <kratsg at gmail.com
> <mailto:kratsg at gmail.com>
> > <mailto:kratsg at gmail.com <mailto:kratsg at gmail.com> >> wrote:
> > >> > Hi Manju,
> > >> >
> > >> > Indeed, you might be right... I guess now I'm confused by why
> Xilinx is
> > >> > not
> > >> > exporting the HDF to a device tree correctly:
> > >> >
> > >> > Our block design has the DDR set to 16gigs here:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > https://www.dropbox.com/s/r8yzbvlf9kov8ei/Screenshot%202017-12-
> 06%2018.40.29.png?dl=0
> > >> > Our HDF indicates 2 banks:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > https://www.dropbox.com/s/atodjbt6jf5b4aw/Screenshot%202017-12-
> 06%2018.42.34.png?dl=0
> > >>
> > >> The second bank there is 45GB isn't it (it's hard to count the f's)?
> > >
> > >
> > > In Xilinx SDK, first column is base addr, second column is high addr
> (from
> > > xparameters.h I assume). So I'm reading the SDK as:
> > >
> > > psu_ddr_0 0x0000_0000 -> 0x7fff_ffff
> > > psu_ddr_1 0x8_0000_0000 -> 0xb_7fff_ffff
> > >
> > > which looks like 2GiBs for the first one, and 15GiB for the second.
> Maybe
> > > I'm not doing the math right here..
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> > The device tree right now seems to be saying:
> > >> >
> > >> > bank1 @ 0x0 of size 0x80000000
> > >> > bank2 @ 0x0 of size 0x80000000
> > >>
> > >> The device tree is saying two banks.
> > >>
> > >> 1 bank: addr: 0 size of: 0x80000000 bytes
> > >> 2 bank: addr: 0x800000000 size of 0x80000000 bytes
> > >
> > >
> > > How are you seeing this? I'm a bit confused, since I understand
> > registers as
> > >
> > > reg = <base size>
> > >
> > > but the device tree has a tuple of 4. So I'm not understanding what
> each
> > > element in the tuple means semantically:
> >
> > Remember address-cells and size-cells are set at 2 words, so the
> > values are 2 sets of 2. Aka 64-bit addresses and sizes.
> >
> > https://github.com/kratsg/meta-
> l1calo/blob/master/conf/machine/boards/gfex/prototype3/zynqmp.dtsi#L16
> >
> > >
> > > reg = <0x0 0x0 0x0 0x80000000>, <0x00000008 0x00000000 0x0
> 0x80000000>;
> > >
> > > Bank 1: A1=0x0 A2=0x0 A3=0x0 A4=0x80000000
> > > Bank 2: A1=0x00000008 A2=0x00000000 A3=0x0 A4=0x80000000
> >
> > It looks like DTG has generated the upper word for the second bank
> > size incorrectly? or maybe the issue is that the second bank address
> > range is larger than the available memory? Not sure the problem on the
> > Vivado/HDF/DTG side.
> >
> > Either way the reg property should probably be:
> >
> > reg = <0x0 0x0 0x0 0x80000000>, <0x00000008 0x00000000
> 0x00000003 0x80000000>;
> >
> > 1 bank: addr: 0x0_0000_0000 size of: 0x0_8000_0000 bytes
> > 2 bank: addr: 0x8_0000_0000 size of: 0x3_8000_0000 bytes
> >
> > 0x3_8000_0000 + 0x8000_0000 = 0x4_0000_0000 == 16 GiB
> >
> > Regards,
> > Nathan
> >
> > >
> > > But the sizes seem wrong to me.
> > >
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> > I'm guessing the 1st and 3rd blocks here (size=0x0) could be safely
> > >> > deleted.
> > >>
> > >> No, don't delete them.
> > >>
> > >> > So I'm misunderstanding this. Is there a reason for this not to
> match? A
> > >> > bug?
> > >>
> > >> Can you confirm that your project is set to 16GB of memory (I don't
> > >> know how to do that). Otherwise you can just edit the device tree.
> > >
> > >
> > > We set the DDR in the PS of the block design to 16 GiB as referenced
> in
> > this
> > > screenshot:
> > >
> > >
> > https://www.dropbox.com/s/r8yzbvlf9kov8ei/Screenshot%202017-12-
> 06%2018.40.29.png?dl=0
> > >
> > > Thanks a lot for the help so far! Greatly appreciate it,
> > >
> > > Giordon
> > >
> > > --
> > >
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Mike Looijmans
> System Expert
>
> TOPIC Products
> Materiaalweg 4, NL-5681 RJ Best
> Postbus 440, NL-5680 AK Best
> Telefoon: +31 (0) 499 33 69 79 <tel:+31%20499%20336%20979>
> E-mail: mike.looijmans at topicproducts.com
> <mailto:mike.looijmans at topicproducts.com>
> Website: www.topicproducts.com <http://www.topicproducts.com>
>
> Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> > > meta-xilinx mailing list
> > > meta-xilinx at yoctoproject.org <mailto:meta-
> xilinx at yoctoproject.org> <mailto:meta-xilinx at yoctoproject.org <mailto:meta-
> xilinx at yoctoproject.org> >
> > > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-xilinx
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
More information about the meta-xilinx
mailing list