Re: [U-Boot] IXP425 TEXT_BASE

Hmmm...I can answer myself now. The flash programmer programs the content from TEXT_BASE to end of the u-boot image into flash start location 0x5000_. When u-boot boots, it relocates itself from flash to DRAM location @TEXT_BASE. I still haven't managed to bring up the board. Guess there are so

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] stx: create common vendor hierarchy for Silicon Turnkey boards

Just a general observation: if you are not sure that tlb/law files can be safely factored out and most of the ddr.c files are actually board specific overrides (common part being less than 10 lines) why had you requested me to create a common board hierarchy for these STX boards in the first place

Re: [U-Boot] IXP425 TEXT_BASE

Hi; I understand Wolfgang's argument but setting the TEXT_BASE to this arbitrary high address (DRAM_end - U-boot_size(_end - _start)) does not make sense. I am new to ARM arch but in PowerPC and MIPS, the TEXT_BASE is always set to the reset vector and in ARM, the reset vector is at 0 or 0x

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] stx: create common vendor hierarchy for Silicon Turnkey boards

> > > > Move board definition files for STx XTC, GP3 and SSA > boards into > > common subdirectory and factor out common code. > > > > "-mno-spe" flag common to all MPC85xx configurations > does not work > > so change it to "-mspe=no" which does (GCC bug > 37759). > > > > Signed-off-by: Alex Du

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] stx: create common vendor hierarchy for Silicon Turnkey boards

On Aug 4, 2009, at 6:01 AM, oa...@yahoo.com wrote: > From: Alex Dubov > > Move board definition files for STx XTC, GP3 and SSA boards into > common subdirectory and factor out common code. > > "-mno-spe" flag common to all MPC85xx configurations does not work > so change it to "-mspe=no" which d

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] stxamc8548: make environment use one of the smaller "boot" blocks in flash

> > > > Put environment into .ppcenv section aligned on a > smaller "boot" eraseblock > > boundary near flash end. > > Hm... if you change to code to using a smaller boot > sector... > > >  #define CONFIG_ENV_ADDR      >   (CONFIG_SYS_MONITOR_BASE + 0x38000) > >  #define > CONFIG_ENV_SECT_SIZE 

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mxc_nand: add nand driver for MX2/MX3

On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 05:45:14AM +0400, Ilya Yanok wrote: > + if (this->options & NAND_BUSWIDTH_16) { > + void __iomem *main_buf = host->regs->main_area0; > + /* compress the ID info */ > + writeb(readb(main_buf + 2), main_buf + 1); > + writeb(r

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] 85xx: CONFIG_MP Boot Page Translation update

On Fri, 2009-07-24 at 13:18 -0500, Peter Tyser wrote: > Previously, when CONFIG_MP was defined Boot Page Translation was > unconditionally enabled and secondary cores were put in a spin loop at > address 0xf000. The 0xfxxx address range (ie the Boot Page) was > being remapped to SDRAM via

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] tsec: Wait for auto-negotiation to complete without link

On Sun, 2009-07-19 at 15:14 -0500, Peter Tyser wrote: > On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 15:14 -0600, Peter Tyser wrote: > > Previously, waiting for auto-negotiation would only occur if a valid > > link had been detected. Problems arose when attempting to use a > > tsec immediately after bootup but before li

[U-Boot] [PATCH] xes: Use proper IO access functions

Also fix some minor whitespace oddities while we're cleaning up Signed-off-by: Peter Tyser --- board/xes/common/fsl_8xxx_clk.c |6 ++-- board/xes/common/fsl_8xxx_pci.c | 46 +- board/xes/xpedite5200/xpedite5200.c | 17 ++--- board/xes/xpedi

[U-Boot] [PATCH] 85xx: Remove unused CONFIG_CLEAR_LAW0 defines

Signed-off-by: Peter Tyser --- include/configs/ATUM8548.h |1 - include/configs/MPC8548CDS.h |1 - include/configs/sbc8548.h|1 - 3 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/configs/ATUM8548.h b/include/configs/ATUM8548.h index 7ee05e5..91369a7 100644

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] NAND boot: fix nand_load overlap issue

On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 01:23:43AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Scott, > > In message <1244170414-4840-1-git-send-email-mingkai...@freescale.com> > Mingkai Hu wrote: > > The code copy data from NAND flash block by block, so when > > the data length isn't a whole-number multiple of the block

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] stxamc8548: make environment use one of the smaller "boot" blocks in flash

Dear oa...@yahoo.com, In message <1249383697-28141-3-git-send-email-oa...@yahoo.com> you wrote: > > Put environment into .ppcenv section aligned on a smaller "boot" eraseblock > boundary near flash end. Hm... if you change to code to using a smaller boot sector... > #define CONFIG_ENV_ADDR

Re: [U-Boot] bitbang phy driver

Dear Darius Augulis, In message <4a789d2f.1050...@gmail.com> you wrote: > > I see that miiphybb.c driver is used only with PPC architecture yet. > I would like to use it with ARM. Would be it reasonable to make this > driver arch independent? I have small patch and it changes defined ports > an

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] stx: create common vendor hierarchy for Silicon Turnkey boards

Dear oa...@yahoo.com, In message <1249383697-28141-1-git-send-email-oa...@yahoo.com> you wrote: > From: Alex Dubov > > Move board definition files for STx XTC, GP3 and SSA boards into > common subdirectory and factor out common code. > > "-mno-spe" flag common to all MPC85xx configurations does

Re: [U-Boot] CFI driver and P33 64M flash

Hi, I have a similar p30 intel 64M flash.When I try to initialize both banks at 0x2000 and 0x2200, u-boot crashes while initializing second bank at 0x2200, i debugged and found out that u-boot couldn't sucessfully write to second bank. But when i plug in the debugger to my board i can

[U-Boot] bitbang phy driver

Hi all, I see that miiphybb.c driver is used only with PPC architecture yet. I would like to use it with ARM. Would be it reasonable to make this driver arch independent? I have small patch and it changes defined ports and pins with function calls, which should be provided by each CPU. I attac

Re: [U-Boot] Normal command line behavior?

Dear "J.C. Wren", In message <17434f2e0908041305i629aef0dmbf23e620a61fe...@mail.gmail.com> you wrote: > > Not sure about that part. I just went back and looked at cmd_i2c.c, > cmd_yaffs2.c and a few others and I see they all do sub-command processing > with strncmp(), too. I had looked at one o

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH] Add support for Raidsonic ICYBOX NAS4220 board

Dear Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD, In message <20090804194155.ga4...@game.jcrosoft.org> you wrote: > ... > > >> + > > >> +ldr r3, =GEMINI_GLOBAL_ID /* Global ID reg */ > > >> +ldr r4, [r3] > > >> +ldr r5, =0xFF /* Chip revisio

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH] Add support for Raidsonic ICYBOX NAS4220 board

On 08/04/2009 10:41 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > On 19:55 Mon 03 Aug , Darius Augulis wrote: >> On 07/08/2009 01:29 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: >>> On 22:03 Tue 30 Jun , Darius Augulis wrote: This board is based on Cortina Systems networking processor >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3 v4] arm: A320: Add support for Faraday A320 evaluation board

On 08/04/2009 10:48 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > On 09:42 Mon 03 Aug , Darius Augulis wrote: >> On 07/08/2009 02:30 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: >>> On 15:14 Fri 03 Jul , Po-Yu Chuang wrote: This patch adds support for A320 development board from Faraday

Re: [U-Boot] Normal command line behavior?

On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 12:07:17PM -0400, J.C. Wren wrote: > > All fair points. > > > > It appears that the 'nand' commands don't use the new parser structure. > > Do you mean U_BOOT_CMD_MKENT, find_cmd_tbl, etc? Not sure about that part. I j

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Support for the Calao TNY-A9260/TNY-A9G20 boards

On 09:54 Mon 03 Aug , Albin Tonnerre wrote: > On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 04:15:32PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD > wrote : > > On 10:32 Fri 24 Jul , Albin Tonnerre wrote: > > > The Calao TNY-A9260 and TNY-9G20 are boards manufactured and sold by Calao > > > Systems

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH] Add support for Raidsonic ICYBOX NAS4220 board

On 19:55 Mon 03 Aug , Darius Augulis wrote: > On 07/08/2009 01:29 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > On 22:03 Tue 30 Jun , Darius Augulis wrote: > >> This board is based on Cortina Systems networking processor > >> CS3516. It has FA526 core, which is ARMv4 compatible. > >> Many

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3 v4] arm: A320: Add support for Faraday A320 evaluation board

On 09:42 Mon 03 Aug , Darius Augulis wrote: > On 07/08/2009 02:30 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > >On 15:14 Fri 03 Jul , Po-Yu Chuang wrote: > >>This patch adds support for A320 development board from Faraday. This board > >>uses FA526 processor by default and has 512kB and 32

Re: [U-Boot] Normal command line behavior?

On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 12:07:17PM -0400, J.C. Wren wrote: > All fair points. > > It appears that the 'nand' commands don't use the new parser structure. Do you mean U_BOOT_CMD_MKENT, find_cmd_tbl, etc? > The 'nand' and 'nboot' commands use the U_BOOT_CMD macro, and have > repeatable defined as

[U-Boot] expanding number of pci regions

I just noticed that we have MAX_PCI_REGIONS set to 7. On FSL 85xx/ 86xx parts we can have as many as 9 windows. Should I just bump the # of regions to 9 for everyone or #ifdef based on CONFIG_85xx/CONFIG_86xx? - k ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lis

[U-Boot] [PATCH] stxamc8548: make environment use one of the smaller "boot" blocks in flash

From: Alex Dubov Put environment into .ppcenv section aligned on a smaller "boot" eraseblock boundary near flash end. Signed-off-by: Alex Dubov --- board/stx/stxamc8548/u-boot.lds | 11 ++- include/configs/stxamc8548.h|3 ++- 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Re: [U-Boot] Normal command line behavior?

All fair points. It appears that the 'nand' commands don't use the new parser structure. The 'nand' and 'nboot' commands use the U_BOOT_CMD macro, and have repeatable defined as 1. The 'nand' command is doing it's own sub-command parsing (via strcnmp()'s), and as a result, all 'nand' commands ar

Re: [U-Boot] IXP425 TEXT_BASE

Dear Darius Augulis, In message <4a784702.40...@gmail.com> you wrote: > > > No. TEXT_BASE is an absolute address. > > yes, but depends on the physical RAM base and size. Only on ARM (and other architectures that copied it's broken implementation). TEXT_BASE is an absolute address (in the boot fl

Re: [U-Boot] suggest on how to convey value of 'CCSRBAR' to user on FSL PPC parts

On Aug 4, 2009, at 9:43 AM, Peter Tyser wrote: > > We'd toyed around with adding a "memmap" command which would display > chip select mappings, and/or tlb mappings. I think lots of people > (especially end-users) would find this info useful as the same issue > you > have with determining the C

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] stx: add support for AMC8548 board

On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 14:27 +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear oa...@yahoo.com, > > In message <1249383697-28141-2-git-send-email-oa...@yahoo.com> you wrote: > > From: Alex Dubov > > > > STx AMC8548 board is an old, AMC form factor, MPC8548 based board intended > > for RapidIO applications. It f

Re: [U-Boot] suggest on how to convey value of 'CCSRBAR' to user on FSL PPC parts

On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 09:27 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > On Aug 4, 2009, at 9:24 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > > > Dear Kumar Gala, > > > > In message > > <7acc3970-1b73-4828-941c-48c6601a7...@kernel.crashing.org> you wrote: > >> I had two ideas on simple ways to convey the value of CCSRBAR, IMMR, >

Re: [U-Boot] IXP425 TEXT_BASE

On 08/04/2009 04:49 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Darius Augulis, > > In message<4a78342c.5090...@gmail.com> you wrote: >> usually TEXT_BASE is offset, which size depends on your requirements for > > No. TEXT_BASE is an absolute address. yes, but depends on the physical RAM base and size. > >>

Re: [U-Boot] suggest on how to convey value of 'CCSRBAR' to user on FSL PPC parts

On Aug 4, 2009, at 9:24 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Kumar Gala, > > In message > <7acc3970-1b73-4828-941c-48c6601a7...@kernel.crashing.org> you wrote: >> I had two ideas on simple ways to convey the value of CCSRBAR, IMMR, >> etc.. on various Freescale PPC SoCs. Knowing the value is useful

Re: [U-Boot] suggest on how to convey value of 'CCSRBAR' to user on FSL PPC parts

Dear Kumar Gala, In message <7acc3970-1b73-4828-941c-48c6601a7...@kernel.crashing.org> you wrote: > I had two ideas on simple ways to convey the value of CCSRBAR, IMMR, > etc.. on various Freescale PPC SoCs. Knowing the value is useful in > debugging if you need to dump the register space. I

Re: [U-Boot] NAND booting of MPC8313 based Custom board

Hi Thanks for reply. I changed ECCM bit and it fixed "NAND boot... read failed (ltesr)" problem. However, now it again stuck after printing transferring control. It lookes like it is able to copy u-boot image to RAM but not able to run from there. What could be problem in this ? Thanks Rupesh

[U-Boot] suggest on how to convey value of 'CCSRBAR' to user on FSL PPC parts

I had two ideas on simple ways to convey the value of CCSRBAR, IMMR, etc.. on various Freescale PPC SoCs. Knowing the value is useful in debugging if you need to dump the register space. I wanted to see if people had a preference or other ideas: 1. add it as output when we boot: U-Boot 20

Re: [U-Boot] IXP425 TEXT_BASE

Dear Darius Augulis, In message <4a78342c.5090...@gmail.com> you wrote: > > usually TEXT_BASE is offset, which size depends on your requirements for No. TEXT_BASE is an absolute address. > stack size and memory size for malloc. If your DRAM base is 0x0 and > TEXT_BASE is 0xf8, you will hav

[U-Boot] [PATCH] stx: create common vendor hierarchy for Silicon Turnkey boards

From: Alex Dubov Move board definition files for STx XTC, GP3 and SSA boards into common subdirectory and factor out common code. "-mno-spe" flag common to all MPC85xx configurations does not work so change it to "-mspe=no" which does (GCC bug 37759). Signed-off-by: Alex Dubov --- Makefile

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] pci/fsl_pci_init: Fold pci_setup_indirect into fsl_pci_init

On Aug 4, 2009, at 1:07 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Kumar Gala, > > In message <1249352037-25832-1-git-send-email-ga...@kernel.crashing.org > > you wrote: >> Every platform that calls fsl_pci_init calls pci_setup_indirect >> before >> it calls fsl_pci_init. There isn't any reason to just

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] pci/fsl_pci_init: Fold fsl_pci_setup_inbound_windows into fsl_pci_init

On Aug 4, 2009, at 1:09 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Kumar Gala, > > In message <1249352037-25832-2-git-send-email-ga...@kernel.crashing.org > > you wrote: >> Every platform that calls fsl_pci_init calls >> fsl_pci_setup_inbound_windows >> before it calls fsl_pci_init. There isn't any reas

Re: [U-Boot] IXP425 TEXT_BASE

On 08/04/2009 02:59 PM, Teh Kok How wrote: > Hi; > > I am trying to bring up u-boot-2009-08-rc1 on IXP425 board. May > I know what's the reason that the TEXT_BASE is 0x00f8 instead of 0 or > 0x5000? > > Thanks. > Hi Teh, usually TEXT_BASE is offset, which size de

[U-Boot] IXP425 TEXT_BASE

Hi; I am trying to bring up u-boot-2009-08-rc1 on IXP425 board. May I know what's the reason that the TEXT_BASE is 0x00f8 instead of 0 or 0x5000? Thanks. Regards, KH ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http

Re: [U-Boot] LCD Display.

Dear Tuma, In message <200908041619.12488.chernigovs...@spb.gs.ru> you wrote: > > And one more question - how can I outpup some text to the LCD? I *really* recommend to RTFM. > I wanna redirect printf/puts functions from Com1 to LCD. Maybe there is some > example I can look at? => setenv stdou

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] stx: add support for AMC8548 board

Dear oa...@yahoo.com, In message <1249383697-28141-2-git-send-email-oa...@yahoo.com> you wrote: > From: Alex Dubov > > STx AMC8548 board is an old, AMC form factor, MPC8548 based board intended > for RapidIO applications. It features 16MiB NAND flash, one DDR2 soDIMM > slot, ethernet on front pa

[U-Boot] LCD Display.

Hi, All! And one more question - how can I outpup some text to the LCD? I wanna redirect printf/puts functions from Com1 to LCD. Maybe there is some example I can look at? -- Software Developer General Satellite Corp. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@li

[U-Boot] [PATCH] stx: add support for AMC8548 board

From: Alex Dubov STx AMC8548 board is an old, AMC form factor, MPC8548 based board intended for RapidIO applications. It features 16MiB NAND flash, one DDR2 soDIMM slot, ethernet on front panel and backplane, RapidIO on backplane, USB controller on local bus (not currently enabled) and no PCI of

[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] stx: add support for AMC8548 board

STx AMC8548 board is an old, AMC form factor, MPC8548 based board intended for RapidIO applications. It features 16MiB NAND flash, one DDR2 soDIMM slot, ethernet on front panel and backplane, RapidIO on backplane, USB controller on local bus (not currently enabled) and no PCI of any kind. Signed-