Dear Kevin Morfitt,
On 11 February 2010 00:20, Kevin Morfitt
wrote:
> Changes the s3c24x0 files to meet the code style requirements.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Morfitt
> ---
>
> v2 changes:
> - re-number to be 2/3
>
> checkpatch.pl reports no errors.
>
> board/MAI/AmigaOneG3SE/video.c | 1 -
Dear Naveen Krishna Ch,
On 10 February 2010 21:42, Naveen Krishna Ch wrote:
> From: Naveen Krishna CH
>
> Memory subsystem of S5PC100 handles SROM, SRAM, OneDRAM, OneNand,
> NAND Flash, DDRs.
> mem.h is a common place for the register description of Memory subsystem
> of S5PC100.
> Note: Only SR
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Detlev Zundel wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
>> Working on the POST for our board (which I am going to submit
>> to the u-boot in the near future) I was asked to output the POST tests
>> sequence progress to the dedicated LEDs (current test’s index and
>> test’s result – P
HI Kang,
On 10 February 2010 16:04, Minkyu Kang wrote:
> Dear Naveen Krishna Ch,
>
> On 10 February 2010 15:16, Naveen Krishna Ch
> wrote:
> > Hi Kang,
> >
> > On 10 February 2010 11:18, Minkyu Kang wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear Naveen Krishna Ch,
> >>
> >> On 9 February 2010 18:34, Naveen Krishna Ch
Hi kang,
On 11 February 2010 14:12, Minkyu Kang wrote:
> Dear Naveen Krishna Ch,
>
> On 10 February 2010 21:42, Naveen Krishna Ch
> wrote:
> > From: Naveen Krishna CH
> >
> > Memory subsystem of S5PC100 handles SROM, SRAM, OneDRAM, OneNand,
> > NAND Flash, DDRs.
> > mem.h is a common place for
Daniel Gorsulowski wrote:
> - tmp = at91_sys_read(AT91_CKGR_MCFR);
> - } while (!(tmp & AT91_PMC_MAINRDY));
> - main_clock = (tmp & AT91_PMC_MAINF) * (AT91_SLOW_CLOCK / 16);
> + tmp = readl(&pmc->mcfr);
> + } while (!(tm
Hi Minkyu
Thanks for your comments...
On 11/02/2010 08:37, Minkyu Kang wrote:
> Dear Kevin Morfitt,
>
> On 11 February 2010 00:20, Kevin Morfitt
> wrote:
>> Changes the s3c24x0 files to meet the code style requirements.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kevin Morfitt
>> ---
>>
>> v2 changes:
>> - re-number
Hi Michael,
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Detlev Zundel wrote:
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>>> Working on the POST for our board (which I am going to submit
>>> to the u-boot in the near future) I was asked to output the POST tests
>>> sequence progress to the dedicated LEDs (current test’s index and
Hi Eric,
Thank you for the information. Yes, I have found 2 DCD errors when comparing
RedBood DCDs with u-boot DCDs,
I fixed those error and now the MX51 ROM boot loader copies the u-boot code
into RAM.
Someone will need to double check those in Redboot with those in u-boot and
update the u-bo
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Detlev Zundel wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Detlev Zundel wrote:
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
Working on the POST for our board (which I am going to submit
to the u-boot in the near future) I was asked to output the POST tests
s
Hi Michael,
> If I understand you correctly, you suggest adding of direct “weak” calls
> before and after call to POST test callback in the post_run_single
> routine of post.c file
> instead of adding callbacks to the post_test structure.
> Agree, its has the same measure of flexibility.
Yes, I w
Hi Andreas,
> Thank you for the information. Yes, I have found 2 DCD errors when comparing
> RedBood DCDs with u-boot DCDs,
> I fixed those error and now the MX51 ROM boot loader copies the u-boot code
> into RAM.
Would you please be so kind and point those errors out explicitely so
that not e
Hi
I want to use the internal flash , with the U-Boot Loader inside, on my
M5235EVB Demo Board as a MTD Device.
What do I have to do ?
Regards
Wilfried
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Detlev Zundel wrote:
> Would you please be so kind and point those errors out explicitely so
> that not every reader has to find the differences by himself? Posting a
> patch which does the updates would be an easy way to accompish this...
And why not to send a patch to try to get the 3stack boa
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Detlev Zundel wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
>> If I understand you correctly, you suggest adding of direct “weak” calls
>> before and after call to POST test callback in the post_run_single
>> routine of post.c file
>> instead of adding callbacks to the post_test structur
Daniel Gorsulowski wrote:
> Hello Tom,
>
> Tom wrote:
>> Jens Scharsig wrote:
>>> * add's the new temporary CONFIG_AT91_LEGACY to all board configs
>>> This will need for backward compatiblity, while change the SoC access
>>> to c structures. If CONFIG_AT91_LEGACY is defined, the deprecated
>>>
* convert otc570 board to use c stucture SoC access
* change gpio access to at91_gpio syntax
Signed-off-by: Daniel Gorsulowski
---
This patch requires Jens Scharsigs new SoC access patchset.
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-February/067424.html
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010
Magnus Lilja wrote:
> Commit f9b6a1575d9f1ca192e4cb60e547aa66f08baa3f, "i.MX31: fix SPI
> driver for shorter than 32 bit" broke 32 bit transfers. This patch
> makes single 32 bit transfer work again.
>
> Transfer lengths that are known not to work will abort and print
> an error message.
>
> Tes
Hi ,
Where can I find the U-Boot source that supports for Cavium Networks Octeon
CN56xx ?
Regards,
Jamsheeth
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Wilfried,
5235 does not have internal flash.
Alternative, you can use FlexBus-NAND, Or SPI-MMC.
Best Regards,
TsiChung
-Original Message-
From: u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de [mailto:u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de]
On Behalf Of Wilfried Busalski
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 6:11 AM
To
Dear Mohamed Jamsheeth H,
In message <597ff2a31002111005s12c9a8e7h4e60736f99496...@mail.gmail.com> you
wrote:
>
> Where can I find the U-Boot source that supports for Cavium Networks Octeon
> CN56xx ?
I'm afraid you will have to ask Cavium technical support for this.
They never bothered the subm
Kevin Morfitt wrote:
> Changes the names of the s3c24x0 register struct members from upper-case
> to lower-case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Morfitt
> ---
>
> v2 changes - re-number to be 3/3
> v3 changes - re-based to modified patch 2/3
>
> checkpatch.pl reports no errors. MAKEALL ARM9 reports n
Thanks . In that case, I have to go with the source that comes with Cavium
SDK .
Is NET_CONSOLE supported in U-boot 1.1.1 ?
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 12:31 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Mohamed Jamsheeth H,
>
> In message <597ff2a31002111005s12c9a8e7h4e60736f99496...@mail.gmail.com>
> you wrot
Hi,
I'm using an at91sam9260ek board. I configured a watchdog driver in my
kernel only to find out that u-boot turns it off. Seaching the information
in u-boot I came across some ambiguous information about keeping the
watchdog ON.
The big top level README files says I need to define CONFIG_WATCH
Most code defines constants for bit positions by means of "(1 << n)". The Linux
kernel defines the BIT macro for this purpose, providing a uniform and more
readable way to define these constants. This patch adds the BIT macro to
linux/bitops.h, and removes its local definitions from davinci and ixp
Dear Mohamed Jamsheeth H,
In message <597ff2a3100230le0d9e11gc7a9fd483681b...@mail.gmail.com> you
wrote:
>
> Thanks . In that case, I have to go with the source that comes with Cavium
> SDK .
Ask Cavium for more recent code, and/or forward-port and submit the
the patches yourself.
> Is NET_
> I'm using an at91sam9260ek board. I configured a watchdog driver in my
> kernel only to find out that u-boot turns it off.
The problem with 9260 and friends is that the watchdog can be
configured once only. In my experience the best thing to do is
leaving it unconfigured (it triggers in 13 seco
uot; trees."
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-December/065420.html
> Please also include the whole patchset when submitting so I can test it.
> Thanks
> Tom
>
>
>
> __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
> database 4859 (2010021
Thanks ..
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 1:40 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Mohamed Jamsheeth H,
>
> In message <597ff2a3100230le0d9e11gc7a9fd483681b...@mail.gmail.com>
> you wrote:
> >
> > Thanks . In that case, I have to go with the source that comes with
> Cavium
> > SDK .
>
> Ask Cavium for m
the current u-boot.lds target in u-boot depends only on the source file
(typically a u-boot.lds.S). this works fine if someone changes the u-
boot.lds.S file -- it'll force a regeneration. however, if the u-boot.lds.S
file includes u-boot headers such as board config options via config.h, there
Dear Matthias Kaehlcke,
In message <20100211200302.ge15...@darwin> you wrote:
> Most code defines constants for bit positions by means of "(1 << n)". The
> Linux
Most code does? I disagree. Only minor parts of the code do, and I
generally tend to consider this bad style.
> kernel defines the BI
While working on a board similar to the EDB9315A, I had to fix two
more things as my board doesn't boot without them. I already talked
with Matthias Kaehlcke who gave me his ack on those patches.
Alessandro Rubini (2):
ep93xx leds: remove arrays in data section
edb93xx sdram: fix initializati
This code is used at early boot, and using arrays for status
generates references to RAM addresses that are not working.
The patch avoids such structures using a preprocessor macro and
by reading status from hardware in the toggle function.
Meanwhile, inline functions are turned to static to save c
The configuration of SDRAM needs two more writel() operations,
otherwise some boards won't be able to boot. These additional writes
are present in vendor assembly code but were forgotten during the
rewriting in C.
Signed-off-by: Alessandro Rubini
Acked-by: Matthias Kaehlcke
---
board/edb93xx/sd
Dear Mike Frysinger,
In message <201002110520.54552.vap...@gentoo.org> you wrote:
>
> the current u-boot.lds target in u-boot depends only on the source file
> (typically a u-boot.lds.S). this works fine if someone changes the u-
> boot.lds.S file -- it'll force a regeneration. however, if the
Hi Wolfgang,
El Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 09:46:22PM +0100 Wolfgang Denk ha dit:
> Dear Matthias Kaehlcke,
>
> In message <20100211200302.ge15...@darwin> you wrote:
> > Most code defines constants for bit positions by means of "(1 << n)". The
> > Linux
>
> Most code does? I disagree. Only minor par
Much appreciated Alessandro. Some good info to go on. I forgot that u-boot
is a second stage bootloader under the 9260 environment, and that the
AT91 bootstrap program runs before it.
Regards,
/carl h.
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Alessandro Rubini wrote:
> > I'm using an at91sam9260ek board
Hi Alessandro,
El Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 09:46:50PM +0100 Alessandro Rubini ha dit:
> The configuration of SDRAM needs two more writel() operations,
> otherwise some boards won't be able to boot. These additional writes
> are present in vendor assembly code but were forgotten during the
> rewriting
Dear TC Liew,
In message you
wrote:
> Wolfgang,
>
> The following changes since commit 0b692dcb190655c7eb96b6b8003bee163e3b58dd:
> Wolfgang Denk (1):
> Merge branch 'master' of git://git.denx.de/u-boot-net
>
> are available in the git repository at:
>
> git://www.denx.de/git/u-boo
Dear Wolfgang, TsiChung,
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:55:11PM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
[...]
> > Wolfgang Wegner (3):
> > add include/asm-m68k/unaligned.h
> > allow MCF532x to use CONFIG_MONITOR_IS_IN_RAM
>
> This patch adds a too long line. Sorry for not noticing this before.
sorry
Hi,
I know this message is about 18 months old. I am using Uboot 2008.10, which
seems to not include support for creating the Nand BBT (bad block table).
Was this patch released and if so when? Forgive me as I don't know how to
find out.
How best to add BBT support to Uboot? I need to have a BBT
--- u-boot-2009.11.1.orig/net/eth.c 2010-01-25 16:35:12.0 +0800
+++ u-boot-2009.11.1/net/eth.c 2010-02-12 11:18:23.558229895 +0800
@@ -199,7 +199,7 @@
#endif
/* Try board-specific initialization first. If it fails or isn't
* present, try the cpu-specific initial
this patchset?
I think need to rebase for u-boot-arm or u-boot-samsung.
>
>> Please also include the whole patchset when submitting so I can test it.
>> Thanks
>> Tom
>>
>>
>>
>> __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus si
On 2/11/2010 8:08 PM, Teh Kok How wrote:
> --- u-boot-2009.11.1.orig/net/eth.c 2010-01-25 16:35:12.0 +0800
>
> +++ u-boot-2009.11.1/net/eth.c 2010-02-12 11:18:23.558229895 +0800
>
> @@ -199,7 +199,7 @@
>
> #endif
>
> /* Try board-specific initialization first. If it fails o
No, it is a bug. Board_eth_init() calls pci_eth_init() (include/netdev.h)
and if ethernet is soc, CONFIG_PCI is not defined, pci_eth_init() returns 0.
This patch allows cpu_eth_init() to be called.
-Original Message-
From: Ben Warren [mailto:biggerbadder...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, Februa
Tom wrote:
> Daniel Gorsulowski wrote:
>> Hello Tom,
>>
>> Tom wrote:
>>> Jens Scharsig wrote:
* add's the new temporary CONFIG_AT91_LEGACY to all board configs
This will need for backward compatiblity, while change the SoC access
to c structures. If CONFIG_AT91_LEGACY is defined,
> i gave my ack after a visual review of the patch, without having
> tested it. i just installed a patched u-boot on one of my boards and
> it doesn't boot :(
Oh. The opposite of my board.
Then, since I don't have a 9315A but only a similar one, it's better
to drop the patch. I'll have a differe
47 matches
Mail list logo
