Fix the following warning detected by checkpatch.pl:
WARNING: storage class should be at the beginning of the declaration
The following storage class attribute is not detected by checkpatch.py:
static cbmem_init_hook_t init_fn_ ## _ptr_ __attribute__((used,
\
section(".rodata.cbmem_init_hooks"))) = init_fn_;
The following lines generates a false positive:
(pound)define STATIC static
src/include/cpu/amd/common/cbtypes.h:60: WARNING: storage class should
be at the beginning of the declaration
typedef asmlinkage void (*smm_handler_t)(void *);
src/include/cpu/x86/smm.h:514: WARNING: storage class should be at the
beginning of the declaration
(pound)define MAYBE_STATIC static
src/include/stddef.h:34: WARNING: storage class should be at the
beginning of the declaration
TEST=Build and run on Galileo Gen2
Change-Id: Ie087d38e6171b549b90e0b831050ac44746a1e14
Signed-off-by: Lee Leahy <Leroy.P.Leahy@intel.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/18657
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Martin Roth <martinroth@google.com>
Enable uses of a common bootblock_pre_c_entry routine. Pass in TSC
value as a uint64_t value.
TEST=Build for amenia and Galileo Gen2
Change-Id: I8be2e079ababb2cf1f9b7e6293f93e7c778761a1
Signed-off-by: Lee Leahy <leroy.p.leahy@intel.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/15124
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Lee Leahy <lpleahyjr@gmail.com>
Add asmlinkage to bootblock_main_with_timestamp so that it may be called
directly from the assembly code.
TEST=Build for Amenia and Galileo Gen2
Change-Id: Iefb8e5c1ddce2ec495b9272966b595d5adcebc1c
Signed-off-by: Lee Leahy <leroy.p.leahy@intel.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/15125
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@chromium.org>
This is useful, for example, in the bootblock, when a timestamp is
available which predates the call to main() in lib/bootblock.c
Change-Id: I17bb0add9f2d8721504b2e534dd6904d1201989c
Signed-off-by: Alexandru Gagniuc <alexandrux.gagniuc@intel.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/14862
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Julius Werner <jwerner@chromium.org>
There was no 'early' call into the SoC code prior to console
getting initialized. Not having this enforces the mainboard to
drive the setup of the console which typically just ends up
calling into the SoC code. Provide a SoC early init call
to handle this without having to duplicate the same code
in mainboards utilizing the same SoC.
Change-Id: Ia233dc3ae89a77df284d6d5cf5b2b051ad3be089
Signed-off-by: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/13791
Reviewed-by: Furquan Shaikh <furquan@google.com>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Andrey Petrov <andrey.petrov@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Paul Menzel <paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net>
It is silly to have a single header to declare the main()
symbol, however some of the arches provided it while
lib/bootblock.c relied on the arch headers to declare it. Just
move the declaration into its own header file and utilize it.
Change-Id: I743b4c286956ae047c17fe46241b699feca73628
Signed-off-by: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/13681
Reviewed-by: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@google.com>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
When we first added ARM support to coreboot, it was clear that the
bootblock would need to do vastly different tasks than on x86, so we
moved its main logic under arch/. Now that we have several more
architectures, it turns out (as with so many things lately) that x86 is
really the odd one out, and all the others are trying to do pretty much
the same thing. This has already caused maintenance issues as the ARM32
bootblock developed and less-mature architectures were left behind with
old cruft.
This patch tries to address that problem by centralizing that logic
under lib/ for use by all architectures/SoCs that don't explicitly
opt-out (with the slightly adapted existing BOOTBLOCK_CUSTOM option).
This works great out of the box for ARM32 and ARM64. It could probably
be easily applied to MIPS and RISCV as well, but I don't have any of
those boards to test so I'll mark them as BOOTBLOCK_CUSTOM for now and
leave that for later cleanup.
BRANCH=None
BUG=None
TEST=Built Jerry and Falco, booted Oak.
Change-Id: Ibbf727ad93651e388aef20e76f03f5567f9860cb
Signed-off-by: Julius Werner <jwerner@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/12076
Reviewed-by: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@chromium.org>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
2015-11-11 05:08:07 +01:00
Renamed from src/arch/arm/include/bootblock_common.h (Browse further)
Lee Leahy