Jon Loeliger wrote:
nanda wrote:
Hi Stuart,
Thanks for the information. gpp access was resolved.
I was successful in building the linux 2.6.11 using the ltib and
able to bring up the MPC8360 EMDS.
But, I still face the problem for linux kernel 2.6.19 and 2.6.20.
When I tried using lt
Oops, screwed up the function name in the documenting comment for this
function. Trivial correction in this patch.
Signed-off-by: David Gibson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Acked-by: Gerald Van Baren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
David's cut-n-paste fix git-ized and applied to the dtc repo.
Best regards,
gvb
Martyn Welch wrote:
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:04:18 -0500
Kumar Gala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Aug 26, 2008, at 8:13 AM, Martyn Welch wrote:
+
+ PowerPC,[EMAIL PROTECTED] {
+ device_type = "cpu";
+ reg = <0x>;
+
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I have the following problem, when i am trying to boot linux on
MPC8360E MDS board with the mpc836x_mds.dtb created using dtc and
mpc836x_mds.dts in from /arch/powerpc/boot/platforms/dts/ directory of
linux-2.6.22 version.
fdt_chosen: FDT_ERR_BADMAGIC
after this
Scott Wood wrote:
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 08:44:46PM -0400, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
I'm a half-ack. ;-) I'm partial to u-boot's implementation rather than
using a bootwrapper for obvious reasons. The u-boot implementation
takes the blob as a boot parameter and passes it alon
VenkataKrishna wrote:
Dear Friends,
I want to ………
1. How to develop linux BSP to MPC8260.
The term "BSP" (Board Support Package) is not used much in linux-land.
By BSP you are probably referring to a boot program (bootrom) and a
linux configuration (kernel/drivers).
For a bootrom, I recom
Grant Likely wrote:
On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 02:26:32PM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
Does anyone on this list have contacts with the makers of this board?
Its firmware apparently provides a flattened device tree to the OS.
And while this step towards world domination is flattering, it's an
example
Peter Czanik wrote:
Hello,
Kumar Gala írta:
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile b/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile
index c40fb82..52db85a 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile
+++ b/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile
@@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO
BOOTCFLAGS += -g
endif
+DTS_FLAGS
Kumar Gala wrote:
On Mar 18, 2008, at 12:05 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 05:59:03PM -0600, Andy Fleming wrote:
Not all e300 cores support the performance monitors, and the ones
that don't will be confused by the mf/mtpmr instructions. This
allows the support to be optional,
Andy Fleming wrote:
> Not all e300 cores support the performance monitors, and the ones
> that don't will be confused by the mf/mtpmr instructions. This
> allows the support to be optional, so the 8349 can turn it off
> while the 8379 can turn it on. Sadly, those aren't config options,
> so it wi
Kumar Gala wrote:
> On Mar 5, 2008, at 6:33 PM, Gerald Van Baren wrote:
>
>> "Errata to MPC8349EA PowerQUICC[tm] II Pro Integrated Host Processor
>> Family
>> Reference Manual, Rev. 1" (Freescale)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gerald Van Baren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> ---
>>
>> Hi Kumar,
>>
>> Please apply
Jerone Young wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 12:59 -0600, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:30:44 -0600
>> Jerone Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[big snip]
>> You still haven't explained why maintenance is harder or somehow less
>> doable by having it in the dtc repo. Maintenance is v
David Gibson wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 08:18:19PM -0500, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
>> Jon Loeliger wrote:
>>> So, like, the other day David Gibson mumbled:
>>>> In light of the recently discovered bug with NOP handling, this adds
>>>> some more tes
Jon Loeliger wrote:
> So, like, the other day David Gibson mumbled:
>> In light of the recently discovered bug with NOP handling, this adds
>> some more testcases for NOP handling. Specifically, it adds a helper
>> program which will add a NOP tag after every existing tag in a dtb,
>> and runs the
OK git gurus, this is something I have not figured out: the best way to
add acked-by (or additional signed-off-by) lines to git patches.
What I'm talking about is when I've applied a patch to my repo and
published the change on the list and get an "acked-by" back. By the
time I get the ack, th
Jon Smirl wrote:
> On 11/13/07, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> That's why Dominic wants to get OpenOCD running on the PowerPC. All we
>>> need is the programming documentation for controlling the CPU via the
>>> debug hardware.
>> Note that this is basically different for eve
Scott Wood wrote:
> Jerry Van Baren wrote:
>> My concern from the u-boot side is that u-boot has to know exactly
>> *where* to put the expanded blob because it has to pass it to linux
>> and keep it out of linux' way so it doesn't get "stepped on." Li
Scott Wood wrote:
> David Gibson wrote:
>>> How hard would it be to get libfdt to dynamically allocate any extra space
>>> it needs? This is a regression from the current flat device tree code...
>> Uh.. it already does. Or rather, the shims in libfdt-wrapper.c do so,
>> when libfdt functions whi
David Gibson wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 01:14:06PM -0400, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
>> Jon Loeliger wrote:
>>> So, like, the other day Kumar Gala mumbled:
>>>> Jon,
>>>>
>>>> It seems like have libfdt as a unique git repo that is a submodu
Jon Loeliger wrote:
> So, like, the other day Kumar Gala mumbled:
>> Jon,
>>
>> It seems like have libfdt as a unique git repo that is a submodule of
>> the things that need it (dtc, u-boot, etc.) might make some sense and
>> it easier for the projects that need to pull it in.
>>
>> Is this som
Timur Tabi wrote:
> Define the layout of a binary blob that contains a QE firmware and
> instructions
> on how to upload it. Add function qe_upload_microcode() to parse the blob
> and perform the actual upload. Fully define 'struct rsp' in immap_qe.h to
> include the actual RISC Special Register
Scott Wood wrote:
> Jerry Van Baren wrote:
>> Scott Wood wrote:
>>> Kim Phillips wrote:
>>>> The LIBFDT implementation replaces any existing /chosen with its fixed
>>>> up version.
>>
>> Sort of. If /chosen doesn't exist, it creates it.
Scott Wood wrote:
> Kim Phillips wrote:
>> the old FLAT_TREE u-boot fdt fixup code renames any existing chosen
>> node out of the way, and adds its fixed up version as /chosen.
Not in my experience. My experience is that it blindly created a second
/chosen node.
>> The LIBFDT implementation rep
Grant Likely wrote:
> On 7/19/07, Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Grant Likely wrote:
>>> From: Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>
>>> To boot from a cuImage requires the device tree to have a
>>> linux,stdout-path property in the chosen node. This patch adds it
>>> to the .dts files.
>
24 matches
Mail list logo
