On 2011/04/25 11:44 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear ro...@dawes.za.net,
>
> In message<1300435500-4909-11-git-send-email-ro...@dawes.za.net> you wrote:
>> From: ro...@dawes.za.net
>>
>> ---
>> common/image.c |4 ++--
>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> This is the wrong
>-Original Message-
>From: Wolfgang Denk [mailto:w...@denx.de]
>Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 2:51 PM
>To: Xie Shaohui-B21989
>Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Gala Kumar-B11780
>Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH][v4] powerpc: eSPI and eSPI controller
>support
>
>Dear Shaohui Xie,
>
>In message <1303
Dear Macpaul Lin,
In message <1303797876-28548-2-git-send-email-macp...@andestech.com> you wrote:
> Support registers definitions of ftsdmc021 SDRAM controller.
>
> Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin
> ---
> Changes for v2:
> - Add __ASSEMBLY__ protecton to register offset for supporting lowlevel_init
Dear Macpaul Lin,
In message <1303797876-28548-1-git-send-email-macp...@andestech.com> you wrote:
> ftahbc020s.h provides basic definitions of this controller
> to help a SoC which use this AHB Controller could
> do scalable software settings in lowlevel_init.S.
>
> Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin
>
Hi Wolfgang,
2011/4/26 Wolfgang Denk :
> Dear Macpaul Lin,
>> +#define FTSDMC021_OFFSET_BANK7_BSR 0x2C /* External Bank Base/Size Reg
>> 7 */
>
> Lines too long. Please fix globally.
>
> I think it is generally wrong to manually define these offsets here.
> You should use a C struct instead
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 01:42, Shaohui Xie wrote:
> +struct spi_slave *spi_setup_slave(unsigned int bus, unsigned int cs,
> + unsigned int max_hz, unsigned int mode)
> +{
> + fsl = malloc(sizeof(struct fsl_spi_slave));
personally, i like to use sizeof(*fsl). up to you.
> +
>On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 01:42, Shaohui Xie wrote:
>> +struct spi_slave *spi_setup_slave(unsigned int bus, unsigned int cs,
>> + unsigned int max_hz, unsigned int mode) {
>> + fsl = malloc(sizeof(struct fsl_spi_slave));
>
>personally, i like to use sizeof(*fsl). up to you.
>
On 04/26/2011 02:46 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam
> ---
> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx5/soc.c |3 +++
> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-mx5/imx-regs.h |1 +
> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
Hi Fabio,
> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx5/soc
From: Mingkai Hu
Signed-off-by: Mingkai Hu
Singed-off-by: Jerry Huang
Signed-off-by: Shaohui Xie
Cc: Mike Frysinger
---
changes for v2:
remove #ifdef wrapper and refactor spi_xfer by use SPI_XFER(BEGIN | END).
remove 'volatile' use I/O accessors instead.
changes for v3:
move powerpc specific
ftahbc020s.h provides basic definitions of this controller
to help a SoC which use this AHB Controller could
do scalable software settings in lowlevel_init.S.
Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin
---
Changes for v2:
- Add __ASSEMBLY__ protecton to register offset for supporting lowlevel_init
Changes for v
Support registers definitions of ftsdmc021 SDRAM controller.
Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin
---
Changes for v2:
- Add __ASSEMBLY__ protecton to register offset for supporting lowlevel_init
Changes for v3:
- Patch: no change. Changed a mail server to resend this patch
Changes for v4:
- Cleanup.
-
Hi there,
I started with u-boot and now try to get a general understanding of how it
is organized. I use a devkit8000 so my work is mostly specific to that
board. I tried to find the path the u-boot takes to bring up the system.
These are my findings:
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S
- Startup code
- J
Dear Macpaul Lin,
In message <1303813524-28948-2-git-send-email-macp...@andestech.com> you wrote:
> Support registers definitions of ftsdmc021 SDRAM controller.
>
> Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin
> ---
> Changes for v2:
> - Add __ASSEMBLY__ protecton to register offset for supporting lowlevel_init
Dear Simon Schwarz,
In message you wrote:
>
> So my question is: Is this correct? Did I miss something important?
Thiis correct and pretty much complete.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr
Hi Wolfgang,
2011/4/26 Wolfgang Denk :
> Dear Macpaul Lin,
>> + unsigned int RSVED[25]; /* 0x3c-0x9c - Reserved */
>
> Sorry, but only macro definitions use ALL CAPS names. Variables names
> are all lower case.
>
I was think of no used variable will be CAPS names to avoid ty
ftahbc020s.h provides basic definitions of this controller
to help a SoC which use this AHB Controller could
do scalable software settings in lowlevel_init.S.
Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin
---
Changes for v2:
- Add __ASSEMBLY__ protecton to register offset for supporting lowlevel_init
Changes for v
Support registers definitions of ftsdmc021 SDRAM controller.
Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin
---
Changes for v2:
- Add __ASSEMBLY__ protecton to register offset for supporting lowlevel_init
Changes for v3:
- Patch: no change. Changed a mail server to resend this patch
Changes for v4:
- Cleanup.
-
On 04/25/2011 04:59 AM, Jason Hui wrote:
> Hi, Stefano,
Hi Jason,
>>> If you still want me to include the DA9053 support into fsl_pmic,
>>> could you please
>>> extend the fsl_pmic support to easily add another vender's pmic support
>>> first?
>>
>> Really I have not understood your question. Wh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/23/2011 12:10 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> I have tried to move those 'usb_boot' to board files. the only problem is
>> > I have to run this 'usb_boot' very early. after CPU load the real u-boot
>> > to memory
>> > the usb_boot will not working. I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/26/2011 12:04 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> hmm... some question. a little confuse.
>> >
>> > 1. I using all rest of nand as rootfs partition.
>> >do I have keep some space in nand for BBT?
> The last block or so is marked reserved for the BBT.
>
Am 04/21/2011 01:39 PM, schrieb Albert ARIBAUD:
> Le 20/04/2011 21:26, Michael Schwingen a écrit :
>> year, right? Do ACTUX* and DVLHOST boards fit in this description?
>> Yes. The ACTUX board ports are by me, while the DVLHOST machine type
>> seems to be allocated by the manufacturer, Devolo, who
Dear Michael Schwingen,
In message <4db70b98.6040...@discworld.dascon.de> you wrote:
>
> Nevertheless, we need a method so that we no not need to patch the
> mach-types.h after every cacle where the Linux version is pulled in.
Detlev Zundel suggested we might maintain a U-Boot local file
"obsolet
Le 26/04/2011 21:40, Wolfgang Denk a écrit :
> Dear Michael Schwingen,
>
> In message<4db70b98.6040...@discworld.dascon.de> you wrote:
>>
>> Nevertheless, we need a method so that we no not need to patch the
>> mach-types.h after every cacle where the Linux version is pulled in.
>
> Detlev Zundel
Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam
---
Changes since v1:
- Make the revision detection logic simpler as suggested by Stefano
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx5/soc.c | 10 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx5/soc.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx5/soc.c
index
No need to use '#define SYMBOL 1' to make it active.
Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam
---
include/configs/mx31pdk.h | 32
1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/configs/mx31pdk.h b/include/configs/mx31pdk.h
index d4c6d16..50e751a 1
Dear Albert ARIBAUD,
In message <4db72d4a.5070...@aribaud.net> you wrote:
>
> Well, as you stated yourself recently, why would/should we maintain
> mach-types that are apparently not going to be used? Do machine types
> have other uses than for Linux? No code in U-Boot should worry about the
>
On 26.04.2011 23:32, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Albert ARIBAUD,
>
> In message<4db72d4a.5070...@aribaud.net> you wrote:
>>
>> Well, as you stated yourself recently, why would/should we maintain
>> mach-types that are apparently not going to be used? Do machine types
>> have other uses than for Li
Hi,
We have a board based on smdk2416 and we received from the kit
manufacturer, from which we based our own board a custom u-boot, which
contains support for the following SMDK boards:
2412
2416
2440
2442
2443
2450
6400
6410
6430
c100
We are only interested in 2416 atm, but since we use
Hi,
Can I inquire please what has happened with this patch series? Will it be
applied? I have done some basic testing here on Tegra2 and it appears to
work.
Regards,
Simon
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:07 AM, Aneesh V wrote:
> With D-cache and MMU enabled for ARM in u-boot it becomes imperative to
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 6:52 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Dear Simon Glass,
> >
> > In message you
> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> + eth = &usb_eth[usb_max_eth_dev].eth_dev;
> >> >
> >> > Index for eth is usb_max_eth_dev.
> >> >
> >> >> @@
Code clean up of cmd_nvedit.c by using checkpatch.pl.
Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin
---
Changes for v2:
- Replace the ident characters for #ifdef from space to tab.
Changes for v3:
- fix for commit 31e41398, "Fix typo in #error: IS_IN_NOWHERE vs. IS_NOWHERE"
common/cmd_nvedit.c | 148
clean up with 2.6.38 checkpatch.pl
Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin
---
common/cmd_bdinfo.c | 295 ++-
1 files changed, 148 insertions(+), 147 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common/cmd_bdinfo.c b/common/cmd_bdinfo.c
index 1d76ffa..6215e7c 100644
--- a/commo
Hi all,
2011/4/27 Macpaul Lin :
> clean up with 2.6.38 checkpatch.pl
>
> Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin
[PATCH 1/4] cmd_bdinfo.c: clean up with 2.6.38 checkpatch.pl
Sorry for the mistake of wrong subject. This is a single patch.
I'll resend one.
--
Best regards,
Macpaul Lin
_
clean up with 2.6.38 checkpatch.pl
Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin
---
Changes for v2:
- Correct the subject field to single patch.
common/cmd_bdinfo.c | 295 ++-
1 files changed, 148 insertions(+), 147 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common/cmd_bdinfo.c
This fixes floating pin PB14 (DRXD) if it is unconnected, witch cause sometimes
to stop autoboot by receiving char
(noise). It turns internal pull up on this pin.
It turns pull up on all other pins where should be pull up and is set in driver
too.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Prchal
--- u-boot-2010.09
35 matches
Mail list logo
