On Thursday 12 July 2012 21:37:10 you wrote:
> Did not hear any answer to this. Do we get a V3 for this patch?
>
> Or should I assume that the pversions to pick are V2 for 1/3 and 2/3,
> and V3 for 3/3?
Sorry for the late reply. Let me just sort this out. We're talking about three
patches:
1/3
Hi Yann,
On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 17:19:00 +0200,
"Andreas Bießmann" wrote:
> Dear Yann Vernier,
>
> On 05.07.2012 15:22, Yann Vernier wrote:
> > Changed CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE to actual address (required for
> > board_init_f) and moved it into cm4008.h, along with a warning that it
> > must match CON
Dear Yann Vernier,
On 05.07.2012 15:22, Yann Vernier wrote:
> Changed CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE to actual address (required for
> board_init_f) and moved it into cm4008.h, along with a warning that it
> must match CONFIG_SYS_FLASH_BASE (since lowlevel_init relocates there).
> lowlevel_init now uses CON
I do apologise. I mistakenly entered the wrong message ID for this mail; it is
In-Reply-To: <4ff56547.6070...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] cm4008: Fix ROM relocation.
I shall soon submit the updated patch that does belong in this thread. Sorry!
___
Changed CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE to actual address (required for
board_init_f) and moved it into cm4008.h, along with a warning that it
must match CONFIG_SYS_FLASH_BASE (since lowlevel_init relocates there).
lowlevel_init now uses CONFIG_SYS_FLASH_BASE to map ROM, although the
second bank is still mapp
5 matches
Mail list logo
