Re: [U-Boot] Some thoughts on SPL

2011-12-20 Thread Tom Rini
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > On 12/20/2011 09:38 AM, Tom Rini wrote: >> So, in chasing down another problem I was having (that turned out >> unrelated) I just made SPL use the full NAND stack.  It wouldn't be >> difficult to add CONFIG_SPL_FULL_NAND_SUPPORT > > How about CO

Re: [U-Boot] Some thoughts on SPL

2011-12-20 Thread Scott Wood
On 12/20/2011 09:38 AM, Tom Rini wrote: > So, in chasing down another problem I was having (that turned out > unrelated) I just made SPL use the full NAND stack. It wouldn't be > difficult to add CONFIG_SPL_FULL_NAND_SUPPORT How about CONFIG_SPL_NAND_FULL? > (and either keep the > existing name

Re: [U-Boot] Some thoughts on SPL

2011-12-20 Thread Tom Rini
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 10:20 AM, jonsm...@gmail.com wrote: > The CPU I'm working with, the LPC3130, is kind of an in-between CPU > for SPL. Instead of a tightly constrained RAM of 16KB or so I have > 96KB to work with.  96KB is enough room to support all of the various > boot modes (uart, nand, s

Re: [U-Boot] Some thoughts on SPL

2011-12-18 Thread jonsm...@gmail.com
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Wolfgang, > > On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: >> Dear Simon Glass, >> >> In message >> you >> wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:20 AM, jonsm...@gmail.com wr= >>> ote: >> ... >>> > The concept is to remove

Re: [U-Boot] Some thoughts on SPL

2011-12-17 Thread Simon Glass
Hi Wolfgang, On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Simon Glass, > > In message > you > wrote: >> >> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:20 AM, jonsm...@gmail.com wr= >> ote: > ... >> > The concept is to remove SPL as a special class and turn it into the >> > base layer that ever

Re: [U-Boot] Some thoughts on SPL

2011-12-17 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Simon Glass, In message you wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:20 AM, jonsm...@gmail.com wr= > ote: ... > > The concept is to remove SPL as a special class and turn it into the > > base layer that everything builds on. Changing the model in this was > > should make the config files easi

Re: [U-Boot] Some thoughts on SPL

2011-12-16 Thread jonsm...@gmail.com
The old lpc3130 port works the way you describe. The problem with it is that it is on a three year old u-boot. http://git.lpclinux.com/ It builds a single u-boot image and then slices the SPL piece off from the front of it. On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 12:38 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, D

Re: [U-Boot] Some thoughts on SPL

2011-12-16 Thread Simon Glass
Hi, On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:20 AM, jonsm...@gmail.com wrote: > The CPU I'm working with, the LPC3130, is kind of an in-between CPU > for SPL. Instead of a tightly constrained RAM of 16KB or so I have > 96KB to work with.  96KB is enough room to support all of the various > boot modes (uart, nan

Re: [U-Boot] Some thoughts on SPL

2011-12-16 Thread Scott Wood
On 12/16/2011 11:20 AM, jonsm...@gmail.com wrote: > The CPU I'm working with, the LPC3130, is kind of an in-between CPU > for SPL. Instead of a tightly constrained RAM of 16KB or so I have 16K? Luxury! :-) Many boards have only 4K, and IIRC some have only 2K. > 96KB to work with. 96KB is enoug

[U-Boot] Some thoughts on SPL

2011-12-16 Thread jonsm...@gmail.com
The CPU I'm working with, the LPC3130, is kind of an in-between CPU for SPL. Instead of a tightly constrained RAM of 16KB or so I have 96KB to work with. 96KB is enough room to support all of the various boot modes (uart, nand, spi, USB, etc) but not enough room for the full uboot command set. So