Hi Graeme,
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>
>> I am going to have a similar problem in the SPL soon - how to deal
>> with panic(). Advice gratefully accepted.
>
> Take a leaf out of the Linux x86 source
Hi Simon,
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> I am going to have a similar problem in the SPL soon - how to deal
> with panic(). Advice gratefully accepted.
Take a leaf out of the Linux x86 source
arch/x86/boot/main.c - This is the start of the 16-bit 'real-mode' code
wh
Hi Wolfgang,
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Simon,
>
> In message
> you
> wrote:
>>
>> >> Yes, it is there, sorry.
>> >
>> > Which commit is that?
>>
>> It was 295d3942: Add board_pre_console_putc to deal with early console outp=
>> ut
>>
>> The discussion threads
Dear Simon Glass,
In message
you wrote:
>
> I am going to have a similar problem in the SPL soon - how to deal
> with panic(). Advice gratefully accepted.
The SPL code is not special in this regard: initialize the console
port as soon as possible; then use it.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
Dear Simon,
In message
you wrote:
>
> >> Yes, it is there, sorry.
> >
> > Which commit is that?
>
> It was 295d3942: Add board_pre_console_putc to deal with early console outp=
> ut
>
> The discussion threads are around here:
>
> http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2011-August/099620.html
Stephen,
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> I was under the impression that earlyprintk was a boolean option, and
> didn't take any arguments. But, a quick grep shows that some archs do
> allow it to take an argument. The ARM code that handles the option
> doesn't process t
Hi Wolfgang,
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 6:25 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Simon Glass,
>
> In message
> you
> wrote:
>>
>> >> OK, so revert that commit?
>> >
>> > It hasn't hit mainline yet, or has it?
>>
>> Yes, it is there, sorry.
>
> Which commit is that?
It was 295d3942: Add board_pre_con
Dear Simon Glass,
In message
you wrote:
>
> >> OK, so revert that commit?
> >
> > It hasn't hit mainline yet, or has it?
>
> Yes, it is there, sorry.
Which commit is that?
> > This is why initializing the serial console has always been one of the
> > very, very first initialization steps in
Hi Wolfgang,
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Simon Glass,
>
> In message
> you
> wrote:
>>
>> > No. I do not want to see any PRE_CONSOLE_UART or pre_console_putc()
>> > stuff, because this is bogus. If you do output to a serial UART port,
>> > this _is_ your cons
Dear Simon Glass,
In message
you wrote:
>
> > No. I do not want to see any PRE_CONSOLE_UART or pre_console_putc()
> > stuff, because this is bogus. If you do output to a serial UART port,
> > this _is_ your console. Just use it in the standard war.
> >
> > I made my mind up: I want to get ri
Hi Wolfgang,
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Simon,
>
> In message
> you
> wrote:
>>
>> 3. What you propose is actually very easy to implement - it just
>> requires a new config like CONFIG_DEFAULT_UART or
>> CONFIG_PRE_CONSOLE_UART to be defined, and used in the
>
Dear Stephen,
In message <4f6a1d1e.2090...@wwwdotorg.org> you wrote:
>
> But the last few messages in this thread have all been about the
> following as far as I'm concerned:
>
> * The U-Boot configuration defines which single UART to use for the
> initial console.
>
> * This initial console is
Dear Simon,
In message
you wrote:
>
> 3. What you propose is actually very easy to implement - it just
> requires a new config like CONFIG_DEFAULT_UART or
> CONFIG_PRE_CONSOLE_UART to be defined, and used in the
> board_pre_console_putc() code.
No. I do not want to see any PRE_CONSOLE_UART or
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message <4f6a01d3.3020...@wwwdotorg.org> you wrote:
>
> > It appears that all you are trying here is an annoying, but somewhat
> > unlikely error situation. As marked above (see *), it might make
> > sense to think of alternative ways to find out what the console port
> >
On 03/21/2012 11:50 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Stephen Warren
> wrote:
>> On 03/21/2012 11:13 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>>> Hi Stephen,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Stephen Warren
>>> wrote:
On 03/21/2012 10:59 AM, Simon Glass wrot
Hi Stephen,
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/21/2012 11:13 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi Stephen,
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Stephen Warren
>> wrote:
>>> On 03/21/2012 10:59 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
3. What you propose is actually very easy to imple
On 03/21/2012 11:13 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Stephen Warren
> wrote:
>> On 03/21/2012 10:59 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>>> 3. What you propose is actually very easy to implement - it just
>>> requires a new config like CONFIG_DEFAULT_UART or
>>> CONF
Hi Stephen,
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/21/2012 10:59 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>> 3. What you propose is actually very easy to implement - it just
>> requires a new config like CONFIG_DEFAULT_UART or
>> CONFIG_PRE_CONSOLE_UART to be defined, and used in the
>> bo
On 03/21/2012 10:59 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> 3. What you propose is actually very easy to implement - it just
> requires a new config like CONFIG_DEFAULT_UART or
> CONFIG_PRE_CONSOLE_UART to be defined, and used in the
> board_pre_console_putc() code.
One question here: We already have CONFIG_TEGR
Hi Stephen,
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/21/2012 04:35 AM, Graeme Russ wrote:
>> Hi Stephen, Wolfgang,
>>
>> On 03/21/2012 08:38 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>> Dear Simon Glass,
>>>
>>> In message
>>> you
>>> wrote:
>>
>>> We have standard ways of telling the Li
On 03/21/2012 04:35 AM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Stephen, Wolfgang,
>
> On 03/21/2012 08:38 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>> Dear Simon Glass,
>>
>> In message
>> you
>> wrote:
>
>> We have standard ways of telling the Linux kernel what the console
>> port is - the "console=" boot argument has been
On 03/21/2012 03:38 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
...
> To bring this to a constructive end:
>
> It appears that all you are trying here is an annoying, but somewhat
> unlikely error situation. As marked above (see *), it might make
> sense to think of alternative ways to find out what the console por
Hi Stephen, Wolfgang,
On 03/21/2012 08:38 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Simon Glass,
>
> In message
> you
> wrote:
> We have standard ways of telling the Linux kernel what the console
> port is - the "console=" boot argument has been working fine for many,
> many years and many, many boards
Dear Simon Glass,
In message
you wrote:
>
> > I agree - The board designer should specify a 'default' debug port which
> > is used for all character output prior to the 'configured' console port
> > being initialised.
>
> We can provide that, but if it is wrong for the board we are using,
The
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message <4f68f3d0.6030...@wwwdotorg.org> you wrote:
>
> For each board, there is a single fixed UART that should be used for
Thanks for this statement. I agree 100%.
> both pre-console panic and the "real" console later. This is fixed by
> the single static board design.
Hi Stephen,
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/20/2012 05:33 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> ...
>> We cannot select the UART via CONFIG - remember that all of these
>> boards have the same U-Boot binary. Please read that again :-) The
>> device tree is the only thing that di
Hi Stehpen,
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Graeme,
>
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
>> Hi Simon
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>>> Hi Graeme,
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
Hi Simon,
Hi Graeme,
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Simon
>
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi Graeme,
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
>>> Hi Simon,
>
>>> And we are talking about one board vendor taking a SoC and using UARTA
>
On 03/20/2012 05:33 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
...
> We cannot select the UART via CONFIG - remember that all of these
> boards have the same U-Boot binary. Please read that again :-) The
> device tree is the only thing that distinguishes them. All of the
> CONFIG options are identical for all boards.
Hi Simon
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Graeme,
>
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
>> Hi Simon,
>> And we are talking about one board vendor taking a SoC and using UARTA
>> for the panic output and another board vendor deciding to use UARTB - But
Hi Graeme,
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi Graeme,
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
>>> Hi Simon,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>
We canno
Hi Simon,
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Graeme,
>
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
>> Hi Simon,
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>>> We cannot select the UART via CONFIG - remember that all of these
>>> boards have the
Hi Graeme,
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi Graeme,
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
>>> Hi Stephen, Simon,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Stephen Warren
>>> wrote:
Hi Simon,
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Graeme,
>
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
>> Hi Stephen, Simon,
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Stephen Warren
>> wrote:
>>> On 03/20/2012 02:13 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Stephen,
On
Hi Graeme,
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Stephen, Simon,
>
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 03/20/2012 02:13 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
>>> Hi Stephen,
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Stephen Warren
>>> wrote:
This works toget
Hi Stephen,
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/20/2012 02:13 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi Stephen,
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Stephen Warren
>> wrote:
>>> This works together with a kernel change that looks at the scratchpad
>>> register to determine whi
Hi Stephen, Simon,
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/20/2012 02:13 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi Stephen,
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Stephen Warren
>> wrote:
>>> This works together with a kernel change that looks at the scratchpad
>>> register to determ
On 03/20/2012 02:13 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Stephen Warren
> wrote:
>> This works together with a kernel change that looks at the scratchpad
>> register to determine which of the many UARTs it should use for early
>> printing:
>>
>> http://www.s
Hi Stephen,
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> This works together with a kernel change that looks at the scratchpad
> register to determine which of the many UARTs it should use for early
> printing:
>
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg154633.html
>
> Note that
This works together with a kernel change that looks at the scratchpad
register to determine which of the many UARTs it should use for early
printing:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg154633.html
Note that this configuration only affects the kernel's decompressor and
earlyprintk code. On
40 matches
Mail list logo
