Dear Tom Warren,
In message you
wrote:
>
> >> >> +#define NV_PA_APB_UARTD_BASE (NV_PA_APB_MISC_BASE + 0x6300)
> >> >> +#define NV_PA_APB_UARTE_BASE (NV_PA_APB_MISC_BASE + 0x6400)
> >> >> +#define NV_PA_PMC_BASE 0x7000E400
> >> >
> >> > what is the purpose of NV_PA prefix here?
> >
Wolfgang (& Mike),
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Tom Warren,
>
> In message you
> wrote:
>>
> ...
>> >> +#define NV_PA_APB_UARTD_BASE (NV_PA_APB_MISC_BASE + 0x6300)
>> >> +#define NV_PA_APB_UARTE_BASE (NV_PA_APB_MISC_BASE + 0x6400)
>> >> +#define NV_PA_PMC_BASE
Dear Tom Warren,
In message you
wrote:
>
...
> >> +#define NV_PA_APB_UARTD_BASE (NV_PA_APB_MISC_BASE + 0x6300)
> >> +#define NV_PA_APB_UARTE_BASE (NV_PA_APB_MISC_BASE + 0x6400)
> >> +#define NV_PA_PMC_BASE 0x7000E400
> >
> > what is the purpose of NV_PA prefix here?
> NV_Physical_
Dear Mike Rapoport,
In message <4d3d68a9.4040...@compulab.co.il> you wrote:
>
> Besides, since you're using I/O accessors anyway, the struct can replaces with
> base address and offset definitions.
We do not allow such construtcs in U-Boot. With C structs, you can
have proper type checking by the
Mike,
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 4:55 AM, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On 01/19/11 23:19, Tom Warren wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Tom Warren
>> ---
>> Changes for V2:
>> - Coding style cleanup
>> - Move serial driver changes to separate patch
>> - Use board/nvidia/ instead of /board/t
On 01/19/11 23:19, Tom Warren wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Tom Warren
> ---
> Changes for V2:
> - Coding style cleanup
> - Move serial driver changes to separate patch
> - Use board/nvidia/ instead of /board/tegra
> - Remove TRUE/FALSE defines
> - Use standard NS
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Tom Warren,
>
> In message you
> wrote:
>>
>> I'll take a look at the ARM asm code generated, but you are probably right.
>> But shouldn't the compiler have complained if I wasn't passing the
>> struct address?
>
> I'm surprised about
Dear Tom Warren,
In message you
wrote:
>
> I run checkpatch.pl (v 0.31) on every patch before I submit it, and I
> did see 12 warnings but
> no errors. The warnings were minor - new typedefs and volatile
> structs. Could you please
> provide the text of the checkpatch.pl output so I can see w
Dear Tom Warren,
In message you
wrote:
>
> I'll take a look at the ARM asm code generated, but you are probably right.
> But shouldn't the compiler have complained if I wasn't passing the
> struct address?
I'm surprised about this, too. But then, current mainline code still
has the horrible "
Dear Tom Warren,
In message you
wrote:
...
> > Are all these uart functions board-specific? They look more
> > CPU-specific. If that's the case they should be moved somewhere in
> > arch/arm/*. Other boards that use the Tegra2 don't want to duplicate
> > this code or link into Nvidia's board/
On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 09:41 -0700, Tom Warren wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Peter Tyser wrote:
> > Hi Tom,
> > Some last minutes nits:
> >
> > It looks like some of the new functions can be declared statically.
> > It'd be nice to do so where possible.
> Which functions, Peter? Please
Wolfgang,
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Tom Warren,
>
> In message <1295471986-2395-2-git-send-email-twar...@nvidia.com> you wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Tom Warren
>
> checkpatch.pl reports:
>
> total: 6 errors, 12 warnings, 1155 lines checked
>
> /tmp/p
Graeme,
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 8:19 AM, Tom Warren wrote:
>
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * Routine: uart_clock_init
>> + * Description: init the PLL and clock for the UART in uart_num
>> + */
>> +void uart_clock_init(int uart_num)
>> +{
>> + clk_r
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Peter Tyser wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> Some last minutes nits:
>
> It looks like some of the new functions can be declared statically.
> It'd be nice to do so where possible.
Which functions, Peter? Please point them out specifically, thanks.
>
>
>
>> --- /dev/null
>> ++
Dear Tom Warren,
In message <1295471986-2395-2-git-send-email-twar...@nvidia.com> you wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Tom Warren
checkpatch.pl reports:
total: 6 errors, 12 warnings, 1155 lines checked
/tmp/patch has style problems, please review.
Please clean up.
Best regards,
Wolf
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 8:19 AM, Tom Warren wrote:
> +
> +/*
> + * Routine: uart_clock_init
> + * Description: init the PLL and clock for the UART in uart_num
> + */
> +void uart_clock_init(int uart_num)
> +{
> + clk_rst_ctlr *const clkrst = (clk_rst_ctlr *)NV_PA_CLK_RST_BASE;
> + sta
Hi Tom,
Some last minutes nits:
It looks like some of the new functions can be declared statically.
It'd be nice to do so where possible.
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/tegra2/lowlevel_init.S
> @@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
> +/*
> + * Board specific setup info
This is CPU-specific code, correc
Signed-off-by: Tom Warren
---
Changes for V2:
- Coding style cleanup
- Move serial driver changes to separate patch
- Use board/nvidia/ instead of /board/tegra
- Remove TRUE/FALSE defines
- Use standard NS16550 register/bit defines in UART init
Changes for
18 matches
Mail list logo
