On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 11:47 PM Tom Rini wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 06:01:38PM +0530, selvamuthukumar v wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 11:15 PM Selva Muthukumar
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Allow mounting of FIT images. If FIT images are used for firmwa
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 11:15 PM Selva Muthukumar
wrote:
>
> Allow mounting of FIT images. If FIT images are used for firmware upgrade
> from linux, mouting can save space in comparison to using dumpimage.
>
Any comments on this? Is there any other way to get FIT image
contents, without extractin
Hi
I've a UBI image having two volumes, kernel and rootfs. I can tftp the
UBI image to RAM and then write to NAND. I want to validate the kernel
(checksum and signature) before writing the UBI image to flash.
Is there a command available to read a volume from a UBI image that is in RAM?
Thanks.
S
Include board configuration file in fw_printenv to get
default environment variables.
Signed-off-by: Selvamuthukumar
---
I'm not sure whether this can be achived without any change in code,
And howmany other things this change breaks, so marking it as RFC.
tools/env/fw_env.c |4
Wolfgang,
> Most of the bss initialization loop increments 4 bytes
> at a time. And the loop end is checked for an 'equal'
> condition. Make the bss end address aligned by 4, so
> that the loop will end as expected.
Any update about this patch
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 5:19 AM, Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Selvamuthukumar,
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I wrote:
>>
>> > > Should we not perform this change globally, i. e. to *all* linker
>> > > scripts?
>
tch:
>
Thanks for the review. I'll fix the errors and send v2 of this patch.
--
Selvamuthukumar
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
expect a patch that touches all linker scripts, that does not do
bss alignment? If so, I'll send it.
--
Selvamuthukumar
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
---
cpu/mpc83xx/cpu.c |4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cpu/mpc83xx/cpu.c b/cpu/mpc83xx/cpu.c
index 63aa8a4..697482c 100644
--- a/cpu/mpc83xx/cpu.c
+++ b/cpu/mpc83xx/cpu.c
@@ -124,8 +124,8 @@ int checkcpu(void)
* The 'dummy' variable is used to increment
---
This function is not called anywhere within main tree.
This is just for reference. Not to be included in main tree.
cpu/mpc83xx/cpu.c | 38 ++
1 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cpu/mpc83xx/cpu.c b/cpu/mpc83xx/cpu.c
index 586
Reference manual states that MxMR[MAD] increment is the indication
of write to UPM array is complete. Honour that. Also, make the dummy
write explicit.
Signed-off-by: Selvamuthukumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Ignore the previous patch. Sequence of doing things were wroing in
that.
cpu/m
Reference manual states that MxMR[MAD] increment is the indication
of write to UPM array is complete. Honour that. Also, make the dummy
write explicit.
Signed-off-by: Selvamuthukumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
cpu/mpc83xx/cpu.c |3 ++-
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
Currently this is not creating any problem. But it will result
in compilation error when used as below.
printf("CFG_SDRAM_CFG2 - %08x\n", CFG_SDRAM_CFG2);
Signed-off-by: Selvamuthukumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
include/configs/MPC8313ERDB.h |4 ++--
1 files changed, 2
ned-off-by: Selvamuthukumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
cpu/mpc83xx/u-boot.lds |1 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cpu/mpc83xx/u-boot.lds b/cpu/mpc83xx/u-boot.lds
index 99ad675..0d26937 100644
--- a/cpu/mpc83xx/u-boot.lds
+++ b/cpu/mpc83xx/u-boot.lds
@@ -117,6 +117,7 @@ SE
bss initialization loop increments 4 bytes at a time.
And the loop end is checked for an 'equal' condition.
Make the bss end address aligned by 4, so that the loop
will end as expected.
---
cpu/mpc83xx/u-boot.lds |1 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cpu/mpc83xx/
15 matches
Mail list logo