[U-Boot] about nand_read_byte() interface

Hi, all I'm a little confused on NAND read operation. According to NAND character, NAND flash is read page by page, which mean's once you read, at least you should read data with page size (such as 512Bytes) But the nand_read_byte() is implemented as following: static u_char nand_read_byte(s

[U-Boot] Xiamen Jaguar Logistics Co., Ltd.

*Dear Friend,* * * *It will be my pleasure to assist you with your shipments from/into the China. We can handle all types of shipments- FOB/CIF/DDU/DDP/etc. We can do exactly as your appointed shipping agent at China.* * * *Hence, would appreciate if you can give Jaguar Logistics the opportunit

[U-Boot] Pull request: u-boot-sh

Dear Wolfgang, Could you pull from the master branch at git://git.denx.de/u-boot-sh.git ? Best regards, Nobuhiro The following changes since commit f2b4bc04d6aed6be712d236dab48ac4c4da22cbf: Wolfgang Denk (1): Merge branch 'master' of git://git.denx.de/u-boot-cfi-flash are available

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] s3c2410_nand add missing functions for CONFIG_NAND_SPL

Dear Scott, > Why do you need to write to the buffer in the NAND SPL?  I don't think you > need read_byte either. Yes, we don't use nand_read_byte() and nand_write_buf(), it's just copy from drivers/mtd/nand/s3c64xx.c. BR. Hui. ___ U-Boot mailing list

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] cs8900 assign dev->priv before using it

Hi Ben, > Next time please remember your signed-off-by line. OK, thanks. BR. Hui. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM S3C2410 add new board GEC2410

> 2009/10/29 Hui.Tang : >> This patch add a S3C2410-based new board GEC2410. >> Signed-off-by: Hui.Tang >> --- >> Makefile |7 + >> board/gec/gec2410/Makefile| 51 >> board/gec/gec2410/config.mk | 32 +++ >> board/gec/gec2410/flash.

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM S3C2410 add new board GEC2410

Dear Hui.Tang 2009/10/29 Hui.Tang : > > This patch add a S3C2410-based new board GEC2410. > Signed-off-by: Hui.Tang > --- >  Makefile                              |    7 + >  board/gec/gec2410/Makefile            |   51 >  board/gec/gec2410/config.mk           |   32 +++ >  board/gec/gec2410

[U-Boot] [PATCH] sh: Update lowlevel_init.S of espt-giga

There was the point that did not use write macro. Change to write macro. Signed-off-by: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu --- board/espt/lowlevel_init.S | 10 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/board/espt/lowlevel_init.S b/board/espt/lowlevel_init.S index 7d5d72e..7f0686

[U-Boot] [PATCH] sh: Move some defs to convince 'pcrel too far'

32bit mode of sh7785lcr board have 'pcrel too far'' err with lastest SH toolchain. This patch fix this. Signed-off-by: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu Signed-off-by: Takashi Yoshii --- board/renesas/sh7785lcr/lowlevel_init.S | 107 +++ 1 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 54 deleti

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM S3C2410 add new board GEC2410

On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 09:05:59PM +0800, Hui.Tang wrote: > +# PAD_TO used to generate a 4kByte binary needed for the combined image > +# -> PAD_TO = TEXT_BASE + 4096 > +PAD_TO := $(shell expr $$[$(TEXT_BASE) + 4096]) Wasn't there a thread about this construct causing problems in certain env

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] s3c2410_nand add missing functions for CONFIG_NAND_SPL

On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 05:12:14PM +0800, Hui.Tang wrote: > add missing functios nand_read_byte(), nand_write_buf(), nand_read_buf() > for CONFIG_NAND_SPL config, also set nand->select_chip = NULL, since in > nand_boot() we will check it to do a select_chip action. Why do you need to write to the

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Davinci: add a pin multiplexer configuration API

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:38:18 + Nick Thompson wrote: > +int davinci_configure_pin_mux(const struct pinmux_config *pins, int n_pins) > +{ > + int i; > + > + for (i = 0; i < n_pins; i++) { > + int value = pins[i].value; > + int field = pins[i].field; > + > +

Re: [U-Boot] ppc_4xx-objcopy is eating my RAM

alan A. A wrote: > Hi, > > when i try to build u-boot 1.3.2, i get the following error: > > > make[1]: Leaving directory > `/home/ctech/ppc/package/usr/src/u-boot-1.3.2/board/CT/lx411s' > UNDEF_SYM=`ppc_4xx-objdump -x lib_generic/libgeneric.a > board/CT/lx411s/liblx411s.a cpu/ppc4xx/libppc4

[U-Boot] ppc_4xx-objcopy is eating my RAM

Hi, when i try to build u-boot 1.3.2, i get the following error: make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/ctech/ppc/package/usr/src/u-boot-1.3.2/board/CT/lx411s' UNDEF_SYM=`ppc_4xx-objdump -x lib_generic/libgeneric.a board/CT/lx411s/liblx411s.a cpu/ppc4xx/libppc4xx.a lib_ppc/libppc.a fs/cramfs/l

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Enable port-mapped access to 16550 UART

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 2:42 AM, Detlev Zundel wrote: > Hi Graeme, > > > [...] > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86 +#define uart_writeb(x,y) outb(x,(ulong)y) +#define uart_readb(y)inb((ulong)y) +#else +#define uart_writeb(x,y) writeb(x,y) +#define uart_readb(y) r

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v3 1/2] NET: Move MDIO regs out of TSEC Space

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:30:44 +0530 Sandeep Gopalpet wrote: > Moved the mdio regs out of the tsec structure,and > provided different offsets for tsec base and mdio > base so that provision for etsec2.0 can be provided. > > This patch helps in providing the support for etsec2.0 > In etsec2.0, the

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Make the generic unaligned access code safe for unaligned access

Stefan Roese wrote: > On Thursday 29 October 2009 16:34:43 Remy Bohmer wrote: >>> No MAKEALL arm regressions. >>> pushed to arm/next. >> Did you notice this is a bug fix? >> Shouldn't it go in this release? > > Yes, I would recommend to push this into this release as well. > This is fine with m

[U-Boot] [PATCH] ppc4xx: Remove duplicated is_pci_host() functions

This patch introduces a weak default function for is_pci_host(), returning 1. This is the default behaviour, since most boards only implement PCI host functionality. This weak default can be overridden by a board specific version if needed. Signed-off-by: Stefan Roese --- board/amcc/bamboo/bambo

[U-Boot] [PATCH] ppc4xx: Consolidate 4xx PCIe board specific configuration

This patch consolidates the PPC4xx board specific PCIe configuration code. This way the duplicated code is removed. Boards can implement a special, non standard behaviour (e.g. number of PCIe slots, etc) by overriding the weak default functions. Signed-off-by: Stefan Roese --- board/amcc/canyonl

[U-Boot] [PATCH] ppc4xx: Canyonlands: Change EBC bus config to drive always (no high-z)

This patch fixes a problem only seen very occasionally on Canyonlands. The NOR flash interface (CFI driver) doesn't work reliably in all cases. Erasing and/or programming sometimes doesn't work. Sometimes with an error message, like "flash not erased" when trying to program an area that should have

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] cs8900 assign dev->priv before using it

Hello Hui, Hui.Tang wrote: > cs8900_get_enetaddr() call get_reg_init_bus(), which will use dev->priv in > CONFIG_CS8900_BUS16 config, so we should assign dev->priv before using it. > > --- > drivers/net/cs8900.c |2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drive

Re: [U-Boot] FPGA relocation/C environment

wolfg...@leila.ping.de (Wolfgang Wegner) wrote on 29/10/2009 16:44:55: > > Hi, > > although I have to leave for now, just some questions to see if > there is anything I understood correctly until now... > > - in the PPC startup (assembly) files, the section .got2 is explicitely > created using ST

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] makefiles: fixes/cleanup for building build tools

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 03:27:26AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Tuesday 27 October 2009 15:34:10 Scott Wood wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 07:57:50PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > perhaps it would make more sense to create a HOSTCOMPILE/HOSTLINK (or > > > whatever) variable so this ki

[U-Boot] [PATCH 0/2] RFC: make U-boot fully PIC

U-boot must be linked to the correct startup address in flash so that global data acceses work before relocation to RAM. This patch demonstrates the changes needed in common code needed to run from any link address. With these changes and a few asm insn in start.S I can link my u-boot to address 0

[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] Use LINK_OFF to access global data

Accessing global data before relocation needs special handling if link address != load address. Use LINK_OFF to calculate the difference. --- common/cmd_nvedit.c |2 ++ common/console.c | 12 +--- common/env_common.c |2 +- cpu/mpc83xx/cpu.c

[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] Use LINK_OFF in enviroment too

This is the most complex change. Keep this one as a separate commit for now. --- common/env_flash.c | 65 +++ 1 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) diff --git a/common/env_flash.c b/common/env_flash.c index b860c48..64882d2 100644 ---

[U-Boot] [PATCH] ppc/8xxx: Don't use pci_cfg on FSL_CORENET platforms

The FSL_CORENET platforms use a completely different means to determine which PCIe port is enabled as well as if its a host or agent/end-point. Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala --- cpu/mpc8xxx/pci_cfg.c |3 +++ 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/cpu/mpc8xxx/pci_cfg.c b/c

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Fix for Void function returning value in sbc35-a9g20

s-paul...@ti.com wrote: > From: Sandeep Paulraj > > Void function was returning 0 in the m41t94 rtc driver. > This makes it similar to m41t62 rtc driver. > > Signed-off-by: Sandeep Paulraj > --- > drivers/rtc/m41t94.c |1 - > 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git

Re: [U-Boot] FPGA relocation/C environment

Hi, although I have to leave for now, just some questions to see if there is anything I understood correctly until now... - in the PPC startup (assembly) files, the section .got2 is explicitely created using START_GOT etc. - .got2 contains some vital pointers (vectors) as well as data pointer

Re: [U-Boot] FPGA relocation/C environment

wolfg...@leila.ping.de (Wolfgang Wegner) wrote on 29/10/2009 16:00:04: > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 03:22:24PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > > > It seems like you don't have any relocation data as both __got2_entries and > > __fixup_entries are zero. Something seems broken in general, perhaps y

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Enable port-mapped access to 16550 UART

Hi Graeme, [...] >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86 >>> +#define uart_writeb(x,y) outb(x,(ulong)y) >>> +#define uart_readb(y)inb((ulong)y) >>> +#else >>> +#define uart_writeb(x,y) writeb(x,y) >>> +#define uart_readb(y) readb(y) >>> +#endif >> >> Why do you need a specific variant for X86

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Make the generic unaligned access code safe for unaligned access

On Thursday 29 October 2009 16:34:43 Remy Bohmer wrote: > > No MAKEALL arm regressions. > > pushed to arm/next. > > Did you notice this is a bug fix? > Shouldn't it go in this release? Yes, I would recommend to push this into this release as well. Cheers, Stefan -- DENX Software Engineering Gm

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Davinci: add a pin multiplexer configuration API

Davinci: add a pin multiplexer configuration API. Creates a method allowing pin settings to be logically grouped into data structure arrays and provids an API to configure the PINMUX settings to enable the relevant pin functions. Signed-off-by: Nick Thompson --- Applies to: u-boot-ti The PINMUX

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Make the generic unaligned access code safe for unaligned access

Hi Tom, > No MAKEALL arm regressions. > pushed to arm/next. Did you notice this is a bug fix? Shouldn't it go in this release? Remy ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM AT91 new board EB+CPUx9K2

Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Tom, > > In message <4ae99f40.4000...@windriver.com> you wrote: >>> By the way, the AT91RM9200.h. has hundreds of style problems. >>> This requires a complete revision of the AT91RM9200.h. >>> I can try this, but will take a while and I can't test other >>> RM9200 boar

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Make the generic unaligned access code safe for unaligned access

Remy Bohmer wrote: > Hi Tom, > Looking at the Linux ARM version, the basic difference seems to be the header "include/asm-arm/unaligned.h" which includes this file. The Linux version of "unaligned.h" does *not* include "access_ok.h" at all. It includes "le_byteshift.h" and

Re: [U-Boot] FPGA relocation/C environment

On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 03:22:24PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > It seems like you don't have any relocation data as both __got2_entries and > __fixup_entries are zero. Something seems broken in general, perhaps your > linker script > is bust? I took board/freescale/m5373evb/u-boot.lds with

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM AT91 new board EB+CPUx9K2

Dear Tom, In message <4ae99f40.4000...@windriver.com> you wrote: > > > By the way, the AT91RM9200.h. has hundreds of style problems. > > This requires a complete revision of the AT91RM9200.h. > > I can try this, but will take a while and I can't test other > > RM9200 boards. > > Please limit you

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Make the generic unaligned access code safe for unaligned access

Hi Tom, >>> Looking at the Linux ARM >>> version, the basic difference seems to be the header >>> "include/asm-arm/unaligned.h" which includes this file. The Linux >>> version of "unaligned.h" does *not* include "access_ok.h" at all. It >>> includes "le_byteshift.h" and "be_byteshift.h" instead. A

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Make the generic unaligned access code safe for unaligned access

Remy Bohmer wrote: > Hi, > > 2009/10/29 Stefan Roese : >> Hi Remy, >> >> On Wednesday 28 October 2009 22:13:38 Remy Bohmer wrote: >>> The current generic code for handling unaligned access assumes that >>> the processor can properly handle unaligned accesses itself. >>> This is at least not the ca

Re: [U-Boot] FPGA relocation/C environment

wolfg...@leila.ping.de (Wolfgang Wegner) wrote on 29/10/2009 14:41:00: > > Dear Joakim Tjernlund, > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 02:08:05PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > > > Just to avoid any misunderstandings, the GOT does not hold offsets, it holds > > absolute addresses. These addresses gets a

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM AT91 new board EB+CPUx9K2

Jens Scharsig wrote: > Dear Wolfgang Denk >> Dear Jens Scharsig, >> > >> This is close. Of course we should drop the AT91_REG and use standard >> types instead, and "PIO_OER" is not a logal variable name either >> because it's all-capitals. So this entry should rather look like this: >> >> .

Re: [U-Boot] FPGA relocation/C environment

Dear Joakim Tjernlund, On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 02:08:05PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > Just to avoid any misunderstandings, the GOT does not hold offsets, it holds > absolute addresses. These addresses gets adjusted with an offset when you > relocate. thank you, I already understood this.

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM AT91 new board EB+CPUx9K2

Dear Wolfgang Denk > Dear Jens Scharsig, > > This is close. Of course we should drop the AT91_REG and use standard > types instead, and "PIO_OER" is not a logal variable name either > because it's all-capitals. So this entry should rather look like this: > > ... > u32 pio_oer; >

[U-Boot] [patch v2] Repair build fail in case CONFIG_PPC=n and CONFIG_FIT=y

Signed-off-by: Remy Bohmer --- common/cmd_bootm.c |2 +- include/image.h|2 -- 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) Index: u-boot-git-28102009/common/cmd_bootm.c === --- u-boot-git-28102009.orig/common/cmd_boo

[U-Boot] ethernet duplex mpc8250

hi list, i have a mpc8260 based VME board, running 1.3.3 u-boot (yes i know old, will try to upgrade as soon as possible). The board has trouble negotiating its ethernet (FCC) duplex mode. Sometimes it negotiates full, sometimes half duplex. If the board negotiates full duplex it has trouble to

[U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM S3C2410 add new board GEC2410

This patch add a S3C2410-based new board GEC2410. Signed-off-by: Hui.Tang --- Makefile |7 + board/gec/gec2410/Makefile| 51 board/gec/gec2410/config.mk | 32 +++ board/gec/gec2410/flash.c | 433

Re: [U-Boot] FPGA relocation/C environment

> > Dear Wolfgang Wegner, > > In message <20091029082113.ge3...@leila.ping.de> you wrote: > > > > Now I recognized that commit 6385b28116f775da4771b768ba9bf93c3aaaf26e > > removed FPGA relocation, which of course breaks FPGA code for my > > Coldfire board. > > This is an out-of-tree port, right? If

[U-Boot] [STATUS] "next" branch available and awaiting pulls

Hi, this is just to let you knwo that we now again have an active "next" branch which is waiting for pull requests from the custodians. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groeben

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Repair build failure in case PPC is not defined and FIT is beng used.

Dear Remy, In message <3efb10970910290435y67cd1c37q6152e58de0267...@mail.gmail.com> you wrote: > > > NAK. This code is in no way dependent on the Power architecture, so > > CONFIG_PPC is definitly the wrong thing to check for. > > Well, in include/image.h, line 223 this is listed: ... > > So,

[U-Boot] [PATCH v3 2/2] NET: Base support for etsec2.0

1. Modified the tsec_mdio structure to include the new regs 2. Modified the MDIO_BASE_ADDR so that it will handle both older version and new version of etsec. Signed-off-by: Sandeep Gopalpet --- include/asm-ppc/immap_83xx.h |2 +- include/asm-ppc/immap_85xx.h |6 +- include/asm-ppc/i

[U-Boot] [PATCH v3 1/2] NET: Move MDIO regs out of TSEC Space

Moved the mdio regs out of the tsec structure,and provided different offsets for tsec base and mdio base so that provision for etsec2.0 can be provided. This patch helps in providing the support for etsec2.0 In etsec2.0, the MDIO register space and the etsec reg space are different. Also, moved t

Re: [U-Boot] FPGA relocation/C environment

Dear Wolfgang Denk, On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 12:00:00PM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Wolfgang Wegner, > > In message <20091029082113.ge3...@leila.ping.de> you wrote: > > > > Now I recognized that commit 6385b28116f775da4771b768ba9bf93c3aaaf26e > > removed FPGA relocation, which of course br

Re: [U-Boot] Low BogoMIPS on MPC8541

Thanks for the information... this means less work form me... at least for this day. ciao luigi On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Jens Gehrlein, > > In message <4ae94201.8000...@tqs.de> you wrote: >> >> Seems that the value is about a tenth of the core frequency. >>

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v3 1/2] NET: Move MDIO regs out of TSEC Space

>-Original Message- >From: Kumar Gala [mailto:ga...@kernel.crashing.org] >Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:27 PM >To: Kumar Gopalpet-B05799 >Cc: Phillips Kim-R1AAHA; u-boot@lists.denx.de >Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v3 1/2] NET: Move MDIO regs out >of TSEC Space > > >On Oct 28, 200

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/1] ppc/85xx/pci: fsl_pci_init: pcie agent mode support

> [mailto:u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Ed Swarthout > Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 12:59 PM > > +++ b/board/freescale/mpc8572ds/mpc8572ds.c > > @@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ void pci_init_board(void) > > first_free_busno = fsl_pci_init_port(&pci_info[num++], > > -

[U-Boot] [patch] ARM: Use Linux version for unaligned access code

The asm-arm/unaligned.h includes linux/unaligned/access_ok.h This file is unsafe to be used on ARM, since it does an unaligned memory accesses which fails on ARM. Lookin at Linux the basic difference seems to be the header "include/asm-arm/unaligned.h". The Linux version of "unaligned.h" does *not

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v3 1/2] NET: Move MDIO regs out of TSEC Space

>-Original Message- >From: Phillips Kim-R1AAHA >Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 1:36 AM >To: Kumar Gopalpet-B05799 >Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de >Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] NET: Move MDIO regs out of TSEC Space > >On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 14:19:18 +0530 >Sandeep Gopalpet wrote: > >> Moved the

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Repair build failure in case PPC is not defined and FIT is beng used.

Hi Wolfgang, 2009/10/29 Wolfgang Denk : > Dear Remy Bohmer, > > please pay a little more attention to the commit subjects (here: > s/beng/being/, please); also, make sure the subject is short enough > for a commit message title line. OK. >> >> +#if defined(CONFIG_PPC) >>                        

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Make the generic unaligned access code safe for unaligned access

Hi, 2009/10/29 Stefan Roese : > Hi Remy, > > On Wednesday 28 October 2009 22:13:38 Remy Bohmer wrote: >> The current generic code for handling unaligned access assumes that >> the processor can properly handle unaligned accesses itself. >> This is at least not the case for ARM, which results in ru

Re: [U-Boot] FPGA relocation/C environment

Dear Wolfgang Wegner, In message <20091029082113.ge3...@leila.ping.de> you wrote: > > Now I recognized that commit 6385b28116f775da4771b768ba9bf93c3aaaf26e > removed FPGA relocation, which of course breaks FPGA code for my > Coldfire board. This is an out-of-tree port, right? If your code had be

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Repair build failure in case PPC is not defined and FIT is beng used.

Dear Remy Bohmer, please pay a little more attention to the commit subjects (here: s/beng/being/, please); also, make sure the subject is short enough for a commit message title line. In message <1256764421-27799-7-git-send-email-li...@bohmer.net> you wrote: > Signed-off-by: Remy Bohmer > --- >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM AT91 new board EB+CPUx9K2

Dear Jens Scharsig, In message <4ae946e7.4050...@bus-elektronik.de> you wrote: > > If I understand you correctly now? > The train goes in the opposite direction. > > in the AT91RM9200.h > > a port is defined as > > typedef struct _AT91S_PIO > { > ... > AT91_REG PIO_OER;

Re: [U-Boot] Low BogoMIPS on MPC8541

Dear Jens Gehrlein, In message <4ae94201.8000...@tqs.de> you wrote: > > Seems that the value is about a tenth of the core frequency. > I observed similar on TQM8548. Although I know, that the value > is bogus (as the name tells), do you know the reason, why it > isn't the core frequency? Please

Re: [U-Boot] Query: Does Uboot support CFI flash driver forM29W128GH

Hi Stefan, I have did the same. Thanks for all infomation given so far. Regards, Prakash On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Stefan Roese wrote: > Hi Prakash, > > On Thursday 29 October 2009 07:24:25 prakash bedge wrote: > > Can you please send me the patch details to fixup the CFI query related

Re: [U-Boot] Support for several I2C interfaces in the same board.

Hello javier, javier Martin wrote: >> Hmm.. there is a driver/i2c/mxc_i2c.c driver for i.mx31, maybe the >> i.mx27 is similiar to this? Can you check this? > > Yes, I2C registers are the same in both chips. The only things that I > must change are: > - i2c clock management. > - i2c base addresses

Re: [U-Boot] Support for several I2C interfaces in the same board.

> Hmm.. there is a driver/i2c/mxc_i2c.c driver for i.mx31, maybe the > i.mx27 is similiar to this? Can you check this? Yes, I2C registers are the same in both chips. The only things that I must change are: - i2c clock management. - i2c base addresses. My current approach is trying to make this dr

Re: [U-Boot] Support for several I2C interfaces in the same board.

Hello javier, javier Martin wrote: >> If you need two different hardware interfaces, there >> is an approach, see: >> >> http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot/u-boot-i2c.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/multibus_v2 >> >> I ported (hopefully all) hardware i2c drivers to this new approach, >> but didn;t find the

Re: [U-Boot] Support for several I2C interfaces in the same board.

> If you need two different hardware interfaces, there > is an approach, see: > > http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot/u-boot-i2c.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/multibus_v2 > > I ported (hopefully all) hardware i2c drivers to this new approach, > but didn;t find the time to test this again from scratch, I jus

Re: [U-Boot] Support for several I2C interfaces in the same board.

Hello javier, javier Martin wrote: > I read a discussion about this subject in the past but it didn't > arrive to a conclusion. What would be necessary for supporting two I2C > interfaces? Maybe an i2c command that supports changing active > interface or something similar? What do you mean with t

[U-Boot] [PATCH] s3c2410_nand add missing functions for CONFIG_NAND_SPL

add missing functios nand_read_byte(), nand_write_buf(), nand_read_buf() for CONFIG_NAND_SPL config, also set nand->select_chip = NULL, since in nand_boot() we will check it to do a select_chip action. --- drivers/mtd/nand/s3c2410_nand.c | 39 +-- 1 files ch

[U-Boot] [PATCH] cs8900 assign dev->priv before using it

cs8900_get_enetaddr() call get_reg_init_bus(), which will use dev->priv in CONFIG_CS8900_BUS16 config, so we should assign dev->priv before using it. --- drivers/net/cs8900.c |2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/cs8900.c b/drivers/net/cs8900.c ind

[U-Boot] Support for several I2C interfaces in the same board.

I read a discussion about this subject in the past but it didn't arrive to a conclusion. What would be necessary for supporting two I2C interfaces? Maybe an i2c command that supports changing active interface or something similar? -- Javier Martin Vista Silicon S.L. CDTUC - FASE C - Oficina S-34

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/2]: arm:kirkwood: Add hardware watchdog support for Marvell Kirkwood boards

> -Original Message- > From: Simon Kagstrom [mailto:simon.kagst...@netinsight.net] > Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 1:41 PM > To: U-Boot ML; Prafulla Wadaskar; Wolfgang Denk > Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2]: arm:kirkwood: Add hardware watchdog > support for Marvell Kirkwood boards > > Init

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/2]: common: Add a watchdog CLI command

> -Original Message- > From: Simon Kagstrom [mailto:simon.kagst...@netinsight.net] > Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 1:39 PM > To: U-Boot ML; Prafulla Wadaskar; Wolfgang Denk > Subject: [PATCH v2 1/2]: common: Add a watchdog CLI command > > A watchdog command to enable the watchdog wi

[U-Boot] FPGA relocation/C environment

Hi, I am using U-Boot on a Coldfire to load FPGA code (Xilinx Spartan3 and Altera Cyclone2, currently) and am just trying to update my code base to current U-Boot for finally sending patches. Now I recognized that commit 6385b28116f775da4771b768ba9bf93c3aaaf26e removed FPGA relocation, which of c

[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/2]: arm:kirkwood: Add hardware watchdog support for Marvell Kirkwood boards

Initialize by calling the generic API watchdog_enable() with the number of seconds for the watchdog to timeout. It's not possible to disable the watchdog once it's on. Signed-off-by: Simon Kagstrom --- ChangeLog: v2: * Remove watchdog_disable() * Add check to see that the maximum time

[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/2]: common: Add a watchdog CLI command

A watchdog command to enable the watchdog with a timeout from the CLI can sometimes be useful. Add that. This also adds a common API for enabling watchdogs. The API is simple: int watchdog_enable(unsigned int timeout); the timeout range vary depending on hardware, and the driver should re

[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 0/2]: Watchdog support from the command line

Hi! These two patches add a generic watchdog CLI command and a driver for the watchdog on Marvell Kirkwood that uses it. The command usage is watchdog - Watchdog commands Usage: watchdog - start the watchdog with `timeout' seconds timeout ChangeLog: v2: Adapt according to comments

[U-Boot] [ANNOUNCEMENT] U-Boot-v2 has its own list

Hi all, U-Boot-v2 now has its own list on infradead.org. If you are interested in U-Boot-v2 development please subscribe here: http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/u-boot-v2 So as of now all v2 related topics should go over this list. Thanks Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K.

[U-Boot] [u-boot] [PATCH] imx27: make 26MHz clock input value selectable from config files.

Some boards like Freescale imx27-ipcam and Vista Silicon imx27_visstrim_m10 have 25MHz clocks connected to 26MHz input. This patch allows this value to be specified from the board configuration file in the same way as it is done with 32KHz clock. It does not break any existing board since its def

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM AT91 new board EB+CPUx9K2

Dear Wolfgang Denk >> writel(AT91C_PA23_TXD2, AT91C_PIOA_OER); >> >> is the most correct way. > > "most correct way" are big words. No, this is not "correct" at all. > > The whole set of address / offset definitions in > include/asm-arm/arch-at91rm9200/AT91RM9200.h should be turned into a C > st

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/1] ppc/85xx/pci: fsl_pci_in it: pcie agent mode support

Vivek Mahajan freescale.com> writes: > * Supported in fsl_pci_init_port() after adding pcie_ep as a param > * Mods in 85xx based board specific pci init after this change > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Mahajan freescale.com> > board/freescale/mpc8572ds/mpc8572ds.c |6 +++--- > drivers/pci/fsl_p

[U-Boot] [u-boot] [PATCH] [2/2] [v1.4] mxc_fec: avoid free() calls to already freed pointers.

Sometimes, inside NetLoop, eth_halt() is called before eth_init() has been called. This is harmless except for free() calls to pointers which have not been allocated yet. This patch initializes those pointers to NULL and allocates them only the first time. This way we can get rid of free calls in

Re: [U-Boot] Query: Does Uboot support CFI flash driver forM29W128GH

Hi Prakash, On Thursday 29 October 2009 07:24:25 prakash bedge wrote: > Can you please send me the patch details to fixup the CFI query related bug > for M29W128GH? I did send you the patch in my last mail. You just need to add this code to a board specific file, e.g. board/board_name/board_name.

Re: [U-Boot] Low BogoMIPS on MPC8541

Hi Kumar, Kumar Gala schrieb: > On Oct 27, 2009, at 10:29 AM, Luigi 'Comio' Mantellini wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> I'm working on a stripped-down mpc8541 board (that has just >> a serian and twe enets). >> I have an issue on delay calibration. In fact at boot time, I see the >> following linux prin

[U-Boot] [u-boot] [PATCH] [1/2] [v1.2] mxc_fec: fix some erroneous PHY accesses.

This patch fixes erroneous access to the ethernet PHY which broke the driver. 1. Selector field in the auto-negotiation register must be 0x1 for using 802.3, not 0x0 which is reseved. 2. Access to the PHY address specified by CONFIG_FEC_MXC_PHYADDR, not 0x0 fixed address. This has been tes