On Mon, 17 Aug 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Ack-by: Sergey Kubushyn
---
> For some time there have been repeated reports about build problems
> with some ARM (cross) tool chains. Especially issues about
> (in)compatibility with the tool chain provided runtime support
> library libgcc.a caused to
On Mon, 17 Aug 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > what compiler do you use? I just compiled all the davinci boards with
> > GNUEABI GCC 4.4.1 (binutils ver.2.19.1) and I didn't get a single compiler
> > warning.
>
> I was playing with old tool ch
On Sun, 16 Aug 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Sergey,
>
> in include/asm-arm/arch-davinci/emac_defs.h you declare emac_desc with
> the "volatile" attribute, but when using it, "volatile" is frequently
> added again, resulting in complier warnings like these:
>
> Configuring for davinci_sffsdr
On Sun, 16 Aug 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
OK, I'll try to fix it tomorrow or Monday, very busy right now...
> Dear Sergey,
>
> in include/asm-arm/arch-davinci/emac_defs.h you declare emac_desc with
> the "volatile" attribute, but when using it, "volatile" is frequently
> added again, resulting i
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009, Ulf Samuelsson wrote:
> Many packages support installing the resulting binary in another
> location, but U-Boot does not.
>
> When you use buildsystems like buildroot and openembedded,
> you want to collect the end result in a target directory,
> and while you can use interna
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009, Peter Tyser wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 15:27 -0400, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
> > Kumar Gala wrote:
> > > On Aug 10, 2009, at 1:59 PM, Zang Roy-R61911 wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>> -Original Message-
> > >>> From: Kumar Gala [mailto:ga...@kernel.crashing.org]
> > >>> S
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On Aug 10, 2009, at 1:22 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
> > Dear Kumar Gala,
> >
> > In message <0EB7516A-2F14-42F7-
> > a6ed-555adfab3...@kernel.crashing.org> you wrote:
> >>
> >>> Allocate more space for U-Boot?
> >>
> >> I might turn of BEDBUG as its ne
On Sat, 18 Jul 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you
> wrote:
> >
> > > Will you post patches for this merge window?
> >
> > Are we back at square one or we're gonna implement that weirdo with
> > accessing global variables from object methods?
>
> I suggest you
On Sat, 18 Jul 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Heiko Schocher,
>
> In message <49c89574.9040...@denx.de> you wrote:
> >
> > I want now, because the merge window is open again, restart the
> > the multibus/multiadapter discussion.
>
> No negative feedback has been posted, as far as I can tell.
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009, Jon Smirl wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 6:55 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Dear Richard,
> >
> > In message you wrote:
> >>
> >> Have you considered moving U-boot to "GPLv3-or-later"?
>
> If u-boot goes GPLv3 it will simply cause the people that need secure
> boot to switch
On Sat, 27 Jun 2009, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> >
> > and this is why i dislike the GPLv3. the GPLv2 was all about the
> source, so
> > the conversation between developers and everyone else was "you can
> take my
> > source and modify it all you want, but i want to see the chang
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote:
> k...@koi8.net a ?crit :
> > > > > I downloaded the one I suspect is the more relevant:
> > > > > http://gaming.nv.gov/stats_regs/reg14_tech_stnds.pdf
> > > > > And I cannot found "secure boot" into it.
> > > > Are you looking for a precise phra
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote:
> k...@koi8.net a ?crit :
> > On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote:
> >
> > > k...@koi8.net a ?crit :
> > > > > Please point out precisely the regulations that require secure
> boot.
> > > > > Should be
> > > > > trivial as regulat
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote:
> k...@koi8.net a ?crit :
> > > Please point out precisely the regulations that require secure boot.
> > > Should be
> > > trivial as regulations are by definition public.
> >
> > Do you happen to know what "Google" is?
>
> Yes, thanks :-)
>
>
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Thomas Doerfler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> since this threads gets more and more interesting, just a question out
> of my curiosity:
>
> which operating systems, that get typically booted using U-Boot are
> already under GPL3?
>
> I know that the license of the Boot Loader has nothin
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote:
> k...@koi8.net a ?crit :
> > On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >
> > > On Wednesday 24 June 2009 20:59:11 Richard Stallman wrote:
> > > > The principal purpose of these products is to restrict the
> public's
> > > > freedom. So it i
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 June 2009 20:59:11 Richard Stallman wrote:
> > Embedded systems using core soc silicon from a number of
> manufacturers
> > have started to use what is known as 'secure boot'. This is
> typically
> > the case in applications whic
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear David Hawkins,
>
> In message <4a382998.4010...@ovro.caltech.edu> you wrote:
> >
> > The USB-TAP has a PowerPC processor in it ... so even if you
> > had to blow away the original firmware, I'm sure it wouldn't
> > be too hard to figure out what c
I see you guys talking about BDI3000 and I decided to ask a related
question.
Those who happen to own MPC8548CDS or something like this know it comes with
a small box called CodeWarrior USB TAP.
It is supposed to work with their software one has to pay for. I never used
anything but GCC suite for
On Wed, 8 Apr 2009, Robert Schwebel wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 02:25:57PM -0700, k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > > OK, thanks. Cloning now :)
> >
> > OK, got a look at it. Looks promising but it is in very early stage
> yet... I
> > wouldn't say in pre-conception stage, but definitely on a very
>
On Wed, 8 Apr 2009, k...@koi8.net wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Apr 2009, Robert Schwebel wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 01:18:45PM -0700, k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > > > I suppose you didn't look in the right place. We don't even have
> > support
> > > > for i2c and spi in v2 :-)
> > >
> > > Ah, that's
On Wed, 8 Apr 2009, Robert Schwebel wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 01:18:45PM -0700, k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > > I suppose you didn't look in the right place. We don't even have
> support
> > > for i2c and spi in v2 :-)
> >
> > Ah, that's that forked one! Sorry, my bad... I thought about the new
On Wed, 8 Apr 2009, Robert Schwebel wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 12:25:16PM -0700, k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > On Wed, 8 Apr 2009, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
> >
> > > k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > > > OK, this is _NOT_ just multiple I2C adapters... The entire thing
> is
> > > > fundamentally broken.
> >
On Wed, 8 Apr 2009, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > OK, this is _NOT_ just multiple I2C adapters... The entire thing is
> > fundamentally broken.
> >
> > One supposed to have _THE_ device and only this device is somehow
> supported.
> >
> > Now it is USB. Each and every USB dri
OK, this is _NOT_ just multiple I2C adapters... The entire thing is
fundamentally broken.
One supposed to have _THE_ device and only this device is somehow supported.
Now it is USB. Each and every USB driver exports the same set of functions,
submit_XXX_msg(...) That means there can be one and on
On Wed, 8 Apr 2009, Michael Buesch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm the author of the Linux SSB subsystem, which implements 95% of the
> system
> bootup code for the Broadcom 47xx MIPS architecture.
>
> I'd like to start porting u-boot to the bcm47xx. (I guess nobody started
> with this already?)
Did I mis
On Sat, 4 Apr 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD,
>
> In message <20090404163654.ge32...@game.jcrosoft.org> you wrote:
> >
> > Scoot you brake the rm9200dk
>
> No, he did not. He just made the problem clearly visible - the code
> was has been broken before
On Wed, 1 Apr 2009, Stefan Roese wrote:
> On Wednesday 01 April 2009, Michael Trimarchi wrote:
> > It is just a glue code in linux. Maybe it will be simple if you create
> a
> > core direcory
> > and a host directory under the usb. An move the specific part in the
> host.
>
> Yes, I like this ide
On Wed, 1 Apr 2009, Remy Bohmer wrote:
> Hello Stefan,
>
> > From what I remember we all agreed to move the device drivers (e.g.
> ethernet,
> > NAND, USB, serial etc) from the architecture/board (cpu/... board/...)
> to the
> > drivers directories at some time.
> >
> > Speaking for PPC4xx, the 4
On Wed, 1 Apr 2009, Stefan Roese wrote:
> On Tuesday 31 March 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > In message <20090331192117.gf24...@game.jcrosoft.org> you wrote:
> > > > > drivers/usb/Makefile > | 1 +
> > > > > .../at91/usb.c => drivers/usb/atmel_usb.c | >
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > That's true but... It is not that unusual to have several similar interfaces
> > on a board. There is nothing obscure or weird in that. But allowing for only
> > one of those interfaces (whichever
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > It is supposed to be a "Universal" bootloader. Here is what wiki says:
>
> There is a certain difference between "universal" and "omnipotent".
> Note that it's called "U-Boot", not "O-Boot".
That
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009, Detlev Zundel wrote:
> Hello ksi (so I'll leave it at that),
>
> > First of all, there are several bootable devices on a motherboard itself.
> > These days almost every motherboard has PATA and some kind of SATA RAID
> > controller onboard. The
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009, Detlev Zundel wrote:
> Hi ksi (was it Sergei?),
>
> >> The fundamental concept of u-boot isn't to handle all your devices, it is
> >> to
> >> boot linux (or other OS) and use the OS to handle the multiple devices.
> >
> >
On Tue, 10 Mar 2009, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > Hi, everyone.
> >
> > I wonder if I'm dreaming or the U-Boot is fundamentally broken...
>
> Well... broken can be a relative term. I like to think of it as an
> opportunity to stand on the shoulders of giants. ;-)
:)
> >
Hi, everyone.
I wonder if I'm dreaming or the U-Boot is fundamentally broken...
It looks like there is no support for multiple devices of a same kind at
all.
I'm porting U-Boot to my new MPC8548-based board and it pops up
everywhere...
The first case was I2C subsystem that does not provide for
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On Feb 23, 2009, at 12:42 PM, k...@koi8.net wrote:
>
> > This adds missing tsec12ioovcr to include/asm-ppc/immap_85xx.h. It was
> > named "res14" (for "reserved") while tsec34ioovcr was properly there.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
> > ---
>
This adds tsec12ioovcr to include/asm-ppc/immap_85xx.h (was reserved.)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
---
diff -purN u-boot.orig/include/asm-ppc/immap_85xx.h
u-boot/include/asm-ppc/immap_85xx.h
--- u-boot.orig/include/asm-ppc/immap_85xx.h2009-02-19 13:39:31.0
-0800
+++ u-boot/includ
This adds missing tsec12ioovcr to include/asm-ppc/immap_85xx.h. It was
named "res14" (for "reserved") while tsec34ioovcr was properly there.
Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
---
diff -purN u-boot.orig/include/asm-ppc/immap_85xx.h
u-boot/include/asm-ppc/immap_85xx.h
--- u-boot.orig/include/asm-ppc/
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > > I am sure you could come up with an efficient *and* clean solution - if
> > > you really wanted to try.
> >
> > There is no way you can avoid that very same code repeated several times (7
> > or
On Sun, 22 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > > I suggest that "tmp" gets passed as argument to the macro.
> >
> > It is _NOT_ a macro working on some variable. It is simply repeating
>
> Oh yes, of course it is. It references the variable "t
On Sun, 22 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD,
>
> In message <20090222124436.ga9...@game.jcrosoft.org> you wrote:
> > On 13:52 Thu 19 Feb , k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > > Removed CHECK_NACK macro from Davinci I2C driver for code cleanup.
> > >
> > > Signed-of
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello ksi,
>
> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> >> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> >>>> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> >&
On Fri, 20 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello ksi,
>
> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> >
> >> Hello ksi,
> >>
> >> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrot
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > Argh... Do you understand that those send_start etc. are _NOT_ the
> > functions? One more time -- they are _NOT_ functions, they are _TEMPLATES_.
>
>
> Please, please: calm down.
>
> I think th
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > > For what you will do this, when you can;t use the adapter, when running
> > > from
> > > flash? See Later, why you cannot use it.
> >
> > Using multiple adapters while running from flash is an e
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > > in board config file ... OK, we are worser against your approach, because
> > > we have for all I2C_SDA, I2C_SCL accesses + 1 switch, but I don;t think
> > > this is such a problem.
> >
> > Firs
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > > Macros with magic side effects (here on the variable "tmp" are stronly
> > > deprecated. Please fix this.
> >
> > There is exactly the same code in Davinci I2C driver that had been accepted
> >
Removed CHECK_NACK macro from Davinci I2C driver for code cleanup.
Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
---
cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/i2c.c | 62 +-
1 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/i2c.c b/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/i2c.c
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello Wolfgang,
>
> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Dear k...@koi8.net,
> >
> > In message you wrote:
> >> How would you know what to initialize and what not to? We were initializing
> >
> > I don't know. You probably need some way to encode some kind of
>
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello ksi,
>
> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> >
> >> Hello ksi,
> >>
> >> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
&g
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello ksi,
>
> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> >
> >> Dear k...@koi8.net,
> >>
> >> In message you
> >> wrote:
> >>>> Duplicating the
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello ksi,
>
> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> >
> >> Hello ksi,
> >>
> >> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
&g
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello ksi,
>
> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> >
> >> Hello ksi,
> >>
> >> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
&g
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello ksi,
>
> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> >
> >> Hello Wolfgang,
> >>
> >> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> >>> Dear k...@koi8.net,
> >>>
>
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > Yes, it is possible, but it is not the best approach. Most of those macros
> ...
> > That means that implementation is much worse than _EXISTING_ one. And out of
> > decent and much worse one which
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > How would you know what to initialize and what not to? We were initializing
>
> I don't know. You probably need some way to encode some kind of
> routing information that tells you which adapter(s)
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > > Duplicating the source code (and thus the object code, too) to create
> > > additional instances of basicly the same driver seems to be the wrong
> > > approach to me.
> > >
> > > It doesn't sca
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > You are multiplying entities. i2c_init() is invoked as a part of system
> > bootup process in libXXX/board.c anyways. There is no need for any global
> > variables, even non-writable for proposed c
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Jon,
>
> In message <499c58fa.20...@freescale.com> you wrote:
> >
> > > Trent - you have obviously already spend a lot of effort into
> > > analyzing this code - most probably more time than any other of us.
> > > Based on your experienc
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > OK, for bitbang driver it is just a source file size reduction. We can
> > simply duplicate (triplicate etc.) that file for more than one adapter. What
> > I did makes CPP make that duplication ins
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Heiko,
>
> In message <499bc39c.9050...@denx.de> you wrote:
> >
> > >> But is is possible to use that code when running from flash, if
> > >> this current pointer is writeable ...
> > >
> > > Yes, it is possible, but then - ther eis no need for i
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello ksi,
>
> Heiko Schocher schrieb:
> > Hello ksi,
> >
> > k...@koi8.net wrote:
> >> On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dear k...@koi8.net,
> >>>
> >>
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello ksi,
>
> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> >
> >> Dear k...@koi8.net,
> >>
> >> In message you
> >> wrote:
> [...]
> >>> And remember
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Heiko Schocher,
>
> In message <499bb9c6.6010...@denx.de> you wrote:
> >
> > > You convinced me. This code must not be used before relocation to RAM,
> > > then.
> >
> > But is is possible to use that code when running from flash, if
> > this cur
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello ksi,
>
> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> >
> >> Dear k...@koi8.net,
> >>
> >> In message you
> >> wrote:
> >>> That means you have
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello ksi,
>
> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> >
> >> Dear k...@koi8.net,
> >>
> >> In message you
> >> wrote:
> [...]
> >>> OK, this i
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello Wolfgang,
>
> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Dear k...@koi8.net,
> >
> > In message you
> > wrote:
> [...]
> >>> What makes you insist that we cannot change a variable if we need to
> >>> be able to change one?
> >> It is NOT just variable. My appro
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > > [On the other hand I still wonder why I have never seen any such
> > > board appear to me in real life yet. None of the 500+ boards
> > > supported in U-Boot uses any such configuration.]
> >
>
On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > What is unreadable in that code?
>
> It gets out of control. You don;t see any more how much code gets
> generated from that.
Why not?
But anyways, I can make those instances manually, without CP
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> > Add missing #endif in include/i2c.h
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
> > ---
> > diff -purN u-boot-i2c.ORIG/include/i2c.h u-boot-i2c/include/i2c.h
> > --- u-boot-i2c.ORIG/include/i2c.h 2009-02
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> > Initial multiadapter/multibus I2C support.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
>
> Please start versioning your patches, and make sure it is clear which
> parts belong to which series.
>
> Do not
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Heiko Schocher,
>
> In message <49992bce.5020...@denx.de> you wrote:
> >
> > > You can have, e.g. TWO SPD EEPROMs on different busses. And please
> > > remember
> > > that infamous "640K ought to be enough for anybody..."
> >
> > OK, if we reall
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, good point. But do we need more then one i2c adapter when running
> > > from flash? I see only one reason to use i2c when running from flash:
> > > accessing SPD EEprom ... and this "bus" co
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > That means you have to make changes in two places instead of one -- config
> > file AND $(BOARD).c. Also you use functions instead of macros and you can
> > NOT make them inline because they come f
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
> > ---
> > diff -purN u-boot-i2c.orig/include/configs/MHPC.h
> > u-boot-i2c/include/configs/MHPC.h
> > --- u-boot-i2c.orig/include/configs/MHPC.h 2009-02-12 10:43:41.0
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > -#define CONFIG_HARD_I2C/* I2C with hardware support*/
> > -#undef CONFIG_SOFT_I2C /* I2C bit-banged */
> > -#define CONFIG_SYS_I2C_SPEED 40 /* I2C speed a
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > +#define I2C_SOFT_SEND_START(n) \
> > +static void send_start##n(void) \
> > +{ \
> > + I2C_SOFT_DECLARATIONS##n \
> > + I2C_DELAY##n; \
> > + I2C_SDA##n(1); \
> > + I2C_ACTIVE##n; \
> > +
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> ...
> > +/* I2C registers field definitions */
> > +/* */
> > +/* I2C_CONTROL (R/W) */
>
> Incorrect multi-line comment style. Please fix.
OK.
> > +#define SM501_CHECK_N
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> ...
> > -int i2c_read (uchar chip, uint addr, int alen, uchar * buffer, int len)
> > +static int omap1510_i2c_read (uchar chip, uint addr, int alen, uchar *
> > buffer, int len)
> > {
> > int i;
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
> > ---
> > diff -purN u-boot-i2c.orig/cpu/mpc8xx/video.c u-boot-i2c/cpu/mpc8xx/video.c
> > --- u-boot-i2c.orig/cpu/mpc8xx/video.c 2009-02-12 10:43:41.0
> >
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> ...
> > - if (eeprom_read (dev_addr, 0, i2c_buffer,
> > CONFIG_SYS_IVM_EEPROM_MAX_LEN) != 0) {
> > - printf ("Error reading EEprom\n");
> > - return -2;
> > + if (eeprom_read
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
> > ---
> > diff -purN u-boot-i2c.orig/cpu/mpc8xx/video.c u-boot-i2c/cpu/mpc8xx/video.c
> > --- u-boot-i2c.orig/cpu/mpc8xx/video.c 2009-02-12 10:43:41.0
> >
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> ...
> > diff -purN u-boot-i2c.orig/lib_arm/board.c u-boot-i2c/lib_arm/board.c
> > --- u-boot-i2c.orig/lib_arm/board.c 2009-02-12 10:43:41.0 -0800
> > +++ u-boot-i2c/lib_arm/board.c 2009-02-12
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
> > ---
> > diff -purN u-boot-i2c.orig/common/cmd_date.c u-boot-i2c/common/cmd_date.c
> > --- u-boot-i2c.orig/common/cmd_date.c 2009-02-12 10:43:41.0
> > -
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
> > ---
> > diff -purN u-boot-i2c.orig/common/cmd_date.c u-boot-i2c/common/cmd_date.c
> > --- u-boot-i2c.orig/common/cmd_date.c 2009-02-12 10:43:41.0
> > -
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Heiko,
>
> In message <49992beb.30...@denx.de> you wrote:
> >
> > >> Yes, thats a point. But do we need this before running from ram (except
> > >> one hardwareadapter)?
> > >
> > > Yes, see above.
> >
> > Yes, thats is a problem in my approach,
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > Yep. But nobody's perfect and you can have a situation when you need to
> > access several busses before relocation. It is not hardware for U-Boot, it
> > is U-Boot for hardware. When hardware desi
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > OK, please explain how that cur_adap_nr->hwadapnr gets assigned. Please also
> > explain how can one invoke a function on other adapter than "current".
> > Remember, i2c_init is quite often called
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear k...@koi8.net,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > > Can you please send your patches with some better commit messages.
> > > You only send your Signed-off-by, without any explanation. Please
> > > change this.
> >
> > There is not much sense in e
On Sun, 15 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello ksi,
>
> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > On Sat, 14 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Hello ksi,
> >>
> >> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Fri,
On Sun, 15 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello ksi,
>
> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > On Sat, 14 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Hello ksi,
> >>
> >> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Fri,
On Sat, 14 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello ksi,
>
> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> >> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> >>> Here is the second attempt for initial portion of multibus/multiadapter
> >>> I2C
On Sat, 14 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello ksi,
>
> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> > On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> >> k...@koi8.net wrote:
> >>> Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
> >>> ---
> >>> diff -purN u-boot-i
Initial multiadapter/multibus I2C support.
Atmel AT91RM9200 based boards.
This goes on top of previous patches.
Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
---
diff -purN u-boot-i2c.ORIG/board/cmc_pu2/load_sernum_ethaddr.c
u-boot-i2c/board/cmc_pu2/load_sernum_ethaddr.c
--- u-boot-i2c.ORIG/board/cmc_pu2/loa
Add missing #endif in include/i2c.h
Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
---
diff -purN u-boot-i2c.ORIG/include/i2c.h u-boot-i2c/include/i2c.h
--- u-boot-i2c.ORIG/include/i2c.h 2009-02-13 16:34:36.0 -0800
+++ u-boot-i2c/include/i2c.h2009-02-13 16:25:52.0 -0800
@@ -226,6 +226,7
Initial multiadapter/multibus I2C support.
Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
---
diff -purN u-boot-i2c.orig/include/configs/MHPC.h
u-boot-i2c/include/configs/MHPC.h
--- u-boot-i2c.orig/include/configs/MHPC.h 2009-02-12 10:43:41.0
-0800
+++ u-boot-i2c/include/configs/MHPC.h 2009-02-1
Initial multiadapter/multibus I2C support.
Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
---
diff -purN u-boot-i2c.orig/drivers/i2c/sm502_i2c.c
u-boot-i2c/drivers/i2c/sm502_i2c.c
--- u-boot-i2c.orig/drivers/i2c/sm502_i2c.c 1969-12-31 16:00:00.0
-0800
+++ u-boot-i2c/drivers/i2c/sm502_i2c.c 2009-02
Initial multiadapter/multibus I2C support.
Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
---
diff -purN u-boot-i2c.orig/drivers/i2c/omap1510_i2c.c
u-boot-i2c/drivers/i2c/omap1510_i2c.c
--- u-boot-i2c.orig/drivers/i2c/omap1510_i2c.c 2009-02-12 10:43:41.0
-0800
+++ u-boot-i2c/drivers/i2c/omap1510_i2c.c
Initial multiadapter/multibus I2C support.
Signed-off-by: Sergey Kubushyn
---
diff -purN u-boot-i2c.orig/common/cmd_date.c u-boot-i2c/common/cmd_date.c
--- u-boot-i2c.orig/common/cmd_date.c 2009-02-12 10:43:41.0 -0800
+++ u-boot-i2c/common/cmd_date.c2009-02-12 10:46:00.0
1 - 100 of 156 matches
Mail list logo
