Re: [U-Boot] SMDK6400 regression

2011-09-21 Thread Scott Wood
On 09/21/2011 04:13 AM, Simon Schwarz wrote: > I can provide a quickfix by just remove the static from the > smdk6400-functions. But IMHO it is more sensible to write a proper > header for most of the functions in nand_base.c and remove the static > modifier. Then they can be used in SPLs and no

Re: [U-Boot] SMDK6400 regression

2011-09-21 Thread Simon Schwarz
On 09/20/2011 08:47 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > Copying Simon as the author of the commit, in order to confirm that the > issue is in smdk6400. The problem is that I added a nand_read_buf prototype in nand.h this was defined static in nand_base.c - I removed the static declaration. smdk6400 is d

Re: [U-Boot] SMDK6400 regression

2011-09-20 Thread Simon Schwarz
On 09/20/2011 08:47 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: [SNIP] > > There is a regression in u-boot-ti/next with respect to u-boot-arm/next, > on board smdk6400, causing the following build failure: > > s3c64xx.c:80: error: static declaration of 'nand_read_buf' follows > non-static declaration > /home/uboot/s

[U-Boot] SMDK6400 regression (was: Please pull u-boot-ti/next)

2011-09-19 Thread Albert ARIBAUD
Le 19/09/2011 16:21, Paulraj, Sandeep a écrit : > > >> >> Hi Wofgang, >> >> Le 19/09/2011 09:47, Wolfgang Denk a écrit : >>> Dear Albert ARIBAUD, >>> >>> In message<4e76ebfd.9060...@aribaud.net> you wrote: As this is your 'next' branch, there is an ambiguity: can you please indicat