Am 11/09/2012 16:43, schrieb Eric Nelson:
> On 09/10/2012 08:56 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
>> Hi Stefano,
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Stefano Babic wrote:
>>
>>> This file is identical to imximage.cfg for the mx6qsabrelite board. I
>>> can imagine this is derived board. Why cannot we impl
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Eric Nelson
wrote:
> On 09/10/2012 08:56 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> We also need to add support for a board (our Nitrogen6x) which
> is a slight variation on Sabre Lite.
>
> We have been patching the board/freescale/mx6qsabrelite, and our
> needs can in general be
On 09/10/2012 08:56 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
Hi Stefano,
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Stefano Babic wrote:
This file is identical to imximage.cfg for the mx6qsabrelite board. I
can imagine this is derived board. Why cannot we implement it as a
variant of the original one ? We have several
On 11.09.2012 05:56, Fabio Estevam wrote:
Hi Stefano,
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Stefano Babic wrote:
This file is identical to imximage.cfg for the mx6qsabrelite board. I
can imagine this is derived board. Why cannot we implement it as a
variant of the original one ? We have several ex
Am 11/09/2012 05:56, schrieb Fabio Estevam:
> Hi Stefano,
>
Hi Fabio,
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Stefano Babic wrote:
>
>> This file is identical to imximage.cfg for the mx6qsabrelite board. I
>> can imagine this is derived board. Why cannot we implement it as a
>> variant of the origi
Hi Stefano,
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Stefano Babic wrote:
> This file is identical to imximage.cfg for the mx6qsabrelite board. I
> can imagine this is derived board. Why cannot we implement it as a
> variant of the original one ? We have several example in u-boot, for
> example the efik
Hi Dirk,
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Dirk Behme wrote:
> Will we get an update of this patch?
I plan to send an updated patch in the first week of August.
Regards,
Fabio Estevam
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/
Hi Fabio,
On 15.04.2012 11:02, stefano babic wrote:
Am 14/04/2012 22:13, schrieb Wolfgang Denk:
Dear Stefano,
In message <4f898ca5.8070...@denx.de> you wrote:
The start address CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_START is the lowest address of the
SDRAM that can be accessed, that is MMDC0_ARB_BASE_ADDR (0x100
Am 14/04/2012 22:13, schrieb Wolfgang Denk:
> Dear Stefano,
>
> In message <4f898ca5.8070...@denx.de> you wrote:
>>
>> The start address CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_START is the lowest address of the
>> SDRAM that can be accessed, that is MMDC0_ARB_BASE_ADDR (0x1000) for
>> i.MX6.
>
> But it _should_
Am 14/04/2012 22:15, schrieb Wolfgang Denk:
> Dear Stefano,
>
> In message <4f899f3b.2080...@denx.de> you wrote:
>>
>> Something like this, but not exactly this. After sending my answer I
>> remembered that the stack is *before* u-boot code, and not after as I
>> wrote - using gd->relocaddr is wro
Dear Stefano,
In message <4f899f3b.2080...@denx.de> you wrote:
>
> Something like this, but not exactly this. After sending my answer I
> remembered that the stack is *before* u-boot code, and not after as I
> wrote - using gd->relocaddr is wrong. We should subtract the memory
> reserve for stack
Dear Fabio Estevam,
In message
you wrote:
>
> Something like the patch below? (Build tested only - no hardware handy
> right now)
NAK
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebe
Dear Stefano,
In message <4f898ca5.8070...@denx.de> you wrote:
>
> The start address CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_START is the lowest address of the
> SDRAM that can be accessed, that is MMDC0_ARB_BASE_ADDR (0x1000) for
> i.MX6.
But it _should_ be the lowest address that can _safely_ be used for
such t
Am 14/04/2012 17:28, schrieb Fabio Estevam:
> On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
>
>> Something like the patch below? (Build tested only - no hardware handy
>> right now)
>
> Sorry, I meant the patch below:
>
> --- a/common/cmd_mem.c
> +++ b/common/cmd_mem.c
> @@ -40,6 +40,8
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Something like the patch below? (Build tested only - no hardware handy
> right now)
Sorry, I meant the patch below:
--- a/common/cmd_mem.c
+++ b/common/cmd_mem.c
@@ -40,6 +40,8 @@
#define PRINTF(fmt,args...)
#endif
+DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA
Hi Stefano,
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 11:41 AM, stefano babic wrote:
> Some considerations about this issue. hopefully I am not OT. The values
> put in the configuration file are the default parameters taken by the
> mtest command if no parameters are issued. I agree they must not be set
> to wron
Am 14/04/2012 01:04, schrieb Fabio Estevam:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 7:36 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
>
Hi Fabio,
>> So, would it be OK to use 0x1000 - 0x177f as the memory range for
>> mtest?
Some considerations about this issue. hopefully I am not OT. The values
put in the configurati
On 14.04.2012 01:04, Fabio Estevam wrote:
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 7:36 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
So, would it be OK to use 0x1000 - 0x177f as the memory range for mtest?
Looks like I forgot the relocation. So the range for mtest would be
from 0x1000 until 0x1080 - 1, right?
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 7:36 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> So, would it be OK to use 0x1000 - 0x177f as the memory range for
> mtest?
Looks like I forgot the relocation. So the range for mtest would be
from 0x1000 until 0x1080 - 1, right?
Thanks,
Fabio Estevam
___
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Dirk Behme wrote:
> Regarding the exception vectors:
>
> I would think that the code of the U-Boot exception vectors are located at
>
> #define CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE 0x1780
>
> and
>
> #define CONFIG_LOADADDR 0x1080
Thanks,
On 13.04.2012 17:56, Fabio Estevam wrote:
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 6:36 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Does testing just the first 64 KiB of RAM make any sense? Not to me.
Ok, I will expand the mtest range.
BTW: where are the exception vectors located?
I don't know actually, but would like to l
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 6:36 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Does testing just the first 64 KiB of RAM make any sense? Not to me.
Ok, I will expand the mtest range.
> BTW: where are the exception vectors located?
I don't know actually, but would like to learn about it. Looked at the
generated u-boo
On 11/04/2012 17:28, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Add basic support for mx6qsabresd board.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam
Hi Fabio,
> ---
> MAINTAINERS |1 +
> board/freescale/mx6qsabresd/Makefile | 37 ++
> board/freescale/mx6qsabresd/imximage.cfg |
Dear Wolfgang Denk,
> Dear Fabio Estevam,
>
> In message <1334158122-15219-1-git-send-email-feste...@gmail.com> you wrote:
> > Add basic support for mx6qsabresd board.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam
>
> Could you please add a bit information which sort of board this is,
> where to find d
Dear Fabio Estevam,
In message
you wrote:
>
> >> +#define CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_START 0x1000
> >> +#define CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_END 0x1001
>
> 0x1000 is the start address for DDR on mx6.
>
> mx6qarm2 and mx6qsabrelite do the same approach.
Then these should eventually be fi
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Could you please add a bit information which sort of board this is,
> where to find documetnation about it, etc.?
Ok, will add more information about this board.
I will not be able to point to any documentation about it as it is not
yet pu
Dear Fabio Estevam,
In message <1334158122-15219-1-git-send-email-feste...@gmail.com> you wrote:
> Add basic support for mx6qsabresd board.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam
Could you please add a bit information which sort of board this is,
where to find documetnation about it, etc.?
> +#defin
Add basic support for mx6qsabresd board.
Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam
---
MAINTAINERS |1 +
board/freescale/mx6qsabresd/Makefile | 37 ++
board/freescale/mx6qsabresd/imximage.cfg | 170 +++
board/freescale/mx6qsabresd/mx6qsab
28 matches
Mail list logo
