[PATCH] Thomson IP1000 onboard memory selection

[Joseph Smith]

We have found variations of the Thomson IP1000 (IP1000T) that have 128MB 
onboard memory instead of 64MB. This patch allows a Kconfig option to 
choose between the two.

Signed-off-by: Joseph Smith

[Myles Watson]

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Joseph Smith  wrote:
> We have found variations of the Thomson IP1000 (IP1000T) that have 128MB
> onboard memory instead of 64MB. This patch allows a Kconfig option to choose
> between the two.

Does it have to be chosen at compile time?  Is there no way to auto-detect
it?

Thanks,
Myles

[Joseph Smith]

On 02/12/2010 12:34 PM, Myles Watson wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Joseph Smith <[e-mail]
> > wrote:
> We have found variations of the Thomson IP1000 (IP1000T) that have
> 128MB onboard memory instead of 64MB. This patch allows a Kconfig
> option to choose between the two.
>
>
> Does it have to be chosen at compile time?

Yes, unless you go in and change the hardcoded value before compile time...
> Is there no way to auto-detect it?

Nope, The onboard memory does not have SPD, hence the spd array.

[Joseph Smith]

On 02/12/2010 12:37 PM, Joseph Smith wrote:
> On 02/12/2010 12:34 PM, Myles Watson wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Joseph Smith <[e-mail]
> > > wrote:
> >
> > We have found variations of the Thomson IP1000 (IP1000T) that have
> > 128MB onboard memory instead of 64MB. This patch allows a Kconfig
> > option to choose between the two.
> >
> > Does it have to be chosen at compile time?
>
> Yes, unless you go in and change the hardcoded value before compile time...
> > Is there no way to auto-detect it?
>
> Nope, The onboard memory does not have SPD, hence the spd array.

Sorry not array, I meant structure.

[Myles Watson]

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:37 AM, Joseph Smith  wrote:
> On 02/12/2010 12:34 PM, Myles Watson wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Joseph Smith <[e-mail]
> > > wrote:
> >
> > We have found variations of the Thomson IP1000 (IP1000T) that have
> >    128MB onboard memory instead of 64MB. This patch allows a Kconfig
> >    option to choose between the two.
> >
> > Does it have to be chosen at compile time?
>
> Yes, unless you go in and change the hardcoded value before compile time...

:)
> Is there no way to auto-detect it?
> >
>
> Nope, The onboard memory does not have SPD, hence the spd array.

I was hoping there was some other difference that wasn't related to the RAM.

Acked-by: Myles Watson

Thanks,
Myles

[Joseph Smith]

On 02/12/2010 12:54 PM, Myles Watson wrote:
> Acked-by: Myles Watson <[e-mail] >

Thanks r5122

[Peter Stuge]

Joseph Smith wrote:
> > Is there no way to auto-detect it?
>
> Nope, The onboard memory does not have SPD, hence the spd array.

First configure 128, then test if 65MB can store data, if not then
fall back to 64.

//Peter

[Joseph Smith]

On 02/12/2010 01:33 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Joseph Smith wrote:
> > > Is there no way to auto-detect it?
> >
> > Nope, The onboard memory does not have SPD, hence the spd array.
>
> First configure 128, then test if 65MB can store data, if not then
> fall back to 64.

I guess, but that seems like alot of wasted boot time.....

[Peter Stuge]

Joseph Smith wrote:
> > > > Is there no way to auto-detect it?
> > >
> > > Nope, The onboard memory does not have SPD, hence the spd array.
> >
> > First configure 128, then test if 65MB can store data, if not then
> > fall back to 64.
>
> I guess, but that seems like alot of wasted boot time.....

What are the numbers? Ie. how long does it take to do one MC config,
for 64 or 128?

//Peter

[Joseph Smith]

On 02/12/2010 01:50 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Joseph Smith wrote:
> > > > > Is there no way to auto-detect it?
> > > >
> > > > Nope, The onboard memory does not have SPD, hence the spd array.
> > >
> > > First configure 128, then test if 65MB can store data, if not then
> > > fall back to 64.
> >
> > I guess, but that seems like alot of wasted boot time.....
>
> What are the numbers? Ie. how long does it take to do one MC config,
> for 64 or 128?

Well you would have to go though the whole raminit process to setup 128 
then do a read/write at 65MB, if that fails go through the whole raminit 
process again and setup 64. So basically raminit would take twice as 
long......

[Peter Stuge]

Joseph Smith wrote:
> So basically raminit would take twice as long......

Right. Do you know how long that would be?

//Peter

[Joseph Smith]

On 02/12/2010 02:16 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Joseph Smith wrote:
> > So basically raminit would take twice as long......
>
> Right. Do you know how long that would be?

It takes about 2 seconds to get through raminit..... so that would make 
it about 4 seconds.

Anyways, in this situation I think it would really complicate things, 
because the onboard memory is the second socket (0x51) and the IP1000 
has so-dimm first socket (0x50). SO, to get it to work you only want it 
to happen on the second socket....

I just think it is alot of unnecessary work and time when you can just 
set a setting at build time, it is not like you can change out onboard 
memory......

[Peter Stuge]

Joseph Smith wrote:
> > > So basically raminit would take twice as long......
> >
> > Right. Do you know how long that would be?
>
> It takes about 2 seconds to get through raminit..... so that would
> make it about 4 seconds.

That's really long. I completely agree that's not very nice.
> I just think it is alot of unnecessary work and time when you can
> just set a setting at build time, it is not like you can change out
> onboard memory......

It would be great to have a single image that works on all systems.

But two seconds makes it a difficult option.

//Peter

[Tyson Sawyer]

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Joseph Smith  wrote:
> On 02/12/2010 01:33 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> > Joseph Smith wrote:
> > > > Is there no way to auto-detect it?
> > >
> > > Nope, The onboard memory does not have SPD, hence the spd array.
> >
> > First configure 128, then test if 65MB can store data, if not then
> > fall back to 64.
>
> I guess, but that seems like alot of wasted boot time.....

Been there.  Done that.  Works great!

Cheers!
Ty