Re: iMX ddrphy_utils difference with U-boot

[Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>]

Hi,

On 6/8/26 20:15, Andrei Lalaev wrote:
> Hi Ahmad,
> 
> Thank you for your quick reply.
> 
> On 08.06.26 19:26, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
>> Hello Andrei,
>>
>> On 6/8/26 16:24, Andrei Lalaev wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am moving an iMX8MP module from vendor U-Boot 2024.04 to Barebox 2025.02
>>
>> Sidenote: You'll probably want to use one of the still supported
>> v2026.04 or v2026.06 releases.
>>
> 
> That's our plan for the near future :)
> 
> 
>>> and found a strange difference in the DDR training code:
>>>
>>>   vim drivers/ddr/imx/ddrphy_utils.c +94
>>>
>>> And the corresponding line in U-Boot:
>>>
>>>   vim drivers/ddr/imx/phy/ddrphy_utils.c +101
>>>
>>> Is there any chance that somebody knows/remembers why "return -1" was replaced with "hang()"?
>>
>> I can't speak for Sascha, but having looked at the code, I see no reason
>> why not to propagate the error.
>>
>>> I couldn't find any explanation in the commits/mailing lists.
>>
>> My guess is that it wasn't anticipated that boards would handle
>> the error gracefully to fall back to a different DDR init.
>>
> 
> In our case this is the only option, because we may have 2 and 4 GB modules.
> So, if the 4 GB timings don't apply, we fall back to the 2 GB timings.

Send a patch and we continue the discussion there?

Cheers,
Ahmad

> 
> 
>> Cheers,
>> Ahmad
> 
> 


-- 
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 |