Add detection and initialisation for graphic extension board
and support splash screen when booting. Enable "bmp" command
in the board configuration and provide "disp" command to
be able to switch the display on/off.
Signed-off-by: Anatolij Gustschin
---
v2:
- get rid of exbo.h header and put t
Up to now only reading 'appreg' value was implemented in the
digsyMTC special 'mtc appreg' command. Extend the command to
support writing appreg value, too.
Signed-off-by: Werner Pfister
Signed-off-by: Anatolij Gustschin
Acked-by: Detlev Zundel
---
v2:
- fix typo in error message
board/digs
Hi Anatolij,
> Hi Detlev,
>
> On Fri, 27 May 2011 17:26:24 +0200
> Detlev Zundel wrote:
> ...
>> > PCI cards might need some time after reset to respond.
>> > On some boards (mpc5200 or mpc8260 based) the PCI bus reset is
>> > deasserted at pci_board_init() time, so we can not use available
>> >
Hello Stefano,
> As Fabio already reported, last release is working on mx31pdk.
Yes, I thought so. Thanks to all for the fast response.
> This is ruled by CONFIG_BOARD_EARLY_INIT_F, that is set for the board
> you mention and for qong, too. This is a second MX.31 board where I am
> sure that t
Hello,
I'm trying to get u-boot 2010.12 working on at91sam9260ek devkit with
mmc support. I have read several discussions here and followed the
steps described in README.atmel-mci. (my config and board file are
below...)
There are two issues I'm facing.
The first one: When I enable mmc support, th
Hi
I'm trying to get the full size of the sdram, not the available size
as in gd->ram_size. We use a P2020 so I'm looking in the fsl_
code.
I tried it with fsl_ddr_sdram_size() which from the comment should
just return the size and don't do anything else. However this is
already called in the u-b
Dear Ankita Garg,
In message <20110530063940.gb16...@in.ibm.com> you wrote:
>
> In this regard, we want some help from the u-boot community on designing
> the interfaces. Further, we would like to collaborate with all the SoCs
> that have support for managing memory power on their boards, so we c
Hi,
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 11:49:26AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Ankita Garg,
>
> In message <20110530063940.gb16...@in.ibm.com> you wrote:
> >
> > In this regard, we want some help from the u-boot community on designing
> > the interfaces. Further, we would like to collaborate with all
Dear Simon Glass,
In message you wrote:
>
> Sure if you are tracking the timer, and wait for it to increment, and
> then wait for it to increment a second time, you can be confident that
> the time between the first and second increments is 10ms.
OK. Good.
> But in general it is possible that
Dear Ankita Garg,
In message <20110530102030.gd18...@in.ibm.com> you wrote:
>
> I agree with the above. Its not the power consumed by u-boot that is of
> concern. We want u-boot support in exporting additional information to
> the kernel, regarding the memory hardware characteristics specific to
Hi Wolfgang,
On 30/05/11 20:57, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Simon Glass,
>
> In message you wrote:
>>
>> Sure if you are tracking the timer, and wait for it to increment, and
>> then wait for it to increment a second time, you can be confident that
>> the time between the first and second increm
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message <4de383d3.7020...@gmail.com> you wrote:
>
> Some platforms are _way_ worse than this - I am sure I have seen a udelay()
> done with the millisecond time - So udelay(100) could be closer to
> udelay(1000) - So your above 5 second delay could take as long as 50
> secon
Hi Wolfgang,
On 30/05/11 22:31, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Graeme Russ,
>
> In message <4de383d3.7020...@gmail.com> you wrote:
>>
>> Some platforms are _way_ worse than this - I am sure I have seen a udelay()
>> done with the millisecond time - So udelay(100) could be closer to
>> udelay(1000) -
Hi Anatolij and Detlev,
On Monday 30 May 2011 09:45:08 Detlev Zundel wrote:
> >> Hm, I'm not sure I understand the situation, so please correct me. We
> >> have a "pcidelay" variable, which is used to wait before
> >> pci_board_init() (I'm not counting the semantically different usage in
> >> the
Hi Wolfgang,
On 05/26/2011 03:36 PM, Valentin Longchamp wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Wolfgang Denk [mailto:w...@denx.de]
>>> Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 6:36 PM
>>> To: Valentin Longchamp
>>> Cc: Prafulla Wadaskar; albert.u.b...
>
> I suspected my toolchain already, so I tested 2 different versions:
>
> 1) arm_v6_vfp_le-gcc -v:
> Using built-in specs.
> Target: armv6fl-montavista-linux-gnueabi
> Configured with: ../configure --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu
> --build=i686-pc-linux-gnu --target=armv6fl-montavista-linux-gnueab
Hi,
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 01:01:57PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Ankita Garg,
>
> In message <20110530102030.gd18...@in.ibm.com> you wrote:
> >
> > I agree with the above. Its not the power consumed by u-boot that is of
> > concern. We want u-boot support in exporting additional informa
Dear ALL,
it still escapes me why everyone tries to make things so complicated INSIDE the
loop.
Why not just define an API like this:
u32 timeout = make_timeout(5); /* minimum 5 millisecond timeout */
u32 start = get_timer();
while ((get_timer() - start) < timeout)
...
make_timeout() can
Hi David,
Le 30/05/2011 08:24, "David Müller (ELSOFT AG)" a écrit :
> Hello
>
> Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
>> In message<4dd760eb.2050...@elsoft.ch> you wrote:
>>>
>>> please also apply the following patch and friends
>>>
>>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/93595/
>>>
>>> this will make VCMA9 board
Dear Jan Pohanka,
> I'm trying to get u-boot 2010.12 working on at91sam9260ek devkit with
> mmc support. I have read several discussions here and followed the
> steps described in README.atmel-mci. (my config and board file are
> below...)
2010.12 is outdated. Use current top of tree. Besides I h
Dear Holger Brunck,
In message <4de3bf02.3060...@keymile.com> you wrote:
>
> could you please give us a short note how to proceed with this patch serie? Do
> we wait until Prafulla is back? Is there still a chance for us that these
> patches are pulled for rc2? Even if this is not the case a sho
Dear Ankita Garg,
In message <20110530170917.gc23...@in.ibm.com> you wrote:
>
> > In my opinion it is therefore the responsibility of the creator of
> > the device tree to provide a proper description of the hardware,
> > including the memory power management information.
>
> Ok, thats true. So I
Le 30/05/2011 21:24, Wolfgang Denk a écrit :
> Dear Holger Brunck,
>
> In message<4de3bf02.3060...@keymile.com> you wrote:
>>
>> could you please give us a short note how to proceed with this patch serie?
>> Do
>> we wait until Prafulla is back? Is there still a chance for us that these
>> patche
Le 30/05/2011 21:49, Albert ARIBAUD a écrit :
> Le 30/05/2011 21:24, Wolfgang Denk a écrit :
>> Dear Holger Brunck,
>>
>> In message<4de3bf02.3060...@keymile.com> you wrote:
>>>
>>> could you please give us a short note how to proceed with this patch serie?
>>> Do
>>> we wait until Prafulla is b
Le 30/05/2011 21:57, Albert ARIBAUD a écrit :
> Le 30/05/2011 21:49, Albert ARIBAUD a écrit :
>> Le 30/05/2011 21:24, Wolfgang Denk a écrit :
>>> Dear Holger Brunck,
>>>
>>> In message<4de3bf02.3060...@keymile.com>you wrote:
could you please give us a short note how to proceed with th
Hi Reinhard,
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Reinhard Meyer
wrote:
> Dear ALL,
>
> it still escapes me why everyone tries to make things so complicated INSIDE
> the loop.
>
> Why not just define an API like this:
>
> u32 timeout = make_timeout(5); /* minimum 5 millisecond timeout */
> u32 start
Dear Graeme Russ,
> Hi Reinhard,
>
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Reinhard Meyer
> wrote:
>> Dear ALL,
>>
>> it still escapes me why everyone tries to make things so complicated INSIDE
>> the loop.
>>
>> Why not just define an API like this:
>>
>> u32 timeout = make_timeout(5); /* minimum 5
Hi Reinhard,
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Reinhard Meyer
wrote:
> Dear Graeme Russ,
>>
>> Hi Reinhard,
>>
>> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Reinhard Meyer
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear ALL,
>>>
>>> it still escapes me why everyone tries to make things so complicated
>>> INSIDE the loop.
>>>
>>>
Dear Graeme Russ,
> Hi Reinhard,
>
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Reinhard Meyer
> wrote:
>> Dear Graeme Russ,
>>>
>>> Hi Reinhard,
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Reinhard Meyer
>>> wrote:
Dear ALL,
it still escapes me why everyone tries to make things so co
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Reinhard,
>
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Reinhard Meyer
...
>> make_timeout() can be arch/soc/platform specific and take into account to
>> return at least
>> such a value that the timeout is never cut short. (In case of a 10 ms NIOS
Hi Reinhard,
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Reinhard Meyer
wrote:
> Dear Graeme Russ,
>
>> Hi Reinhard,
>>
>> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Reinhard Meyer
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Graeme Russ,
Hi Reinhard,
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Reinhard Meyer
wrote:
>>
Dear Simon Glass,
> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
>> Hi Reinhard,
>>
>> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Reinhard Meyer
> ...
>>> make_timeout() can be arch/soc/platform specific and take into account to
>>> return at least
>>> such a value that the timeout is never cut sho
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 3:57 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Simon Glass,
>
> In message you wrote:
>>
>> Sure if you are tracking the timer, and wait for it to increment, and
>> then wait for it to increment a second time, you can be confident that
>> the time between the first and second increm
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Reinhard Meyer
wrote:
> Dear Simon Glass,
>
>> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Graeme Russ
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Reinhard,
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Reinhard Meyer
>>
>> ...
make_timeout() can be arch/soc/platform specific and take into ac
Dear Graeme Russ,
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Reinhard Meyer
> wrote:
>> Dear Simon Glass,
>>
>>> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Graeme Russ
>>> wrote:
Hi Reinhard,
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Reinhard Meyer
>>>
>>> ...
>
> make_timeout() can be arch/so
Dear Reinhard Meyer,
In message <4de4743c.5040...@emk-elektronik.de> you wrote:
>
> Exactly! And (saying it silently) this would not mandate that the now hidden
> internal
> timer needs to be in ms units, it could be the bare "natural" tick of the
> hardware...
Yes. We can throw everything awa
Dear Wolfgang Denk,
> Dear Reinhard Meyer,
>
> In message<4de4743c.5040...@emk-elektronik.de> you wrote:
>>
>> Exactly! And (saying it silently) this would not mandate that the now hidden
>> internal
>> timer needs to be in ms units, it could be the bare "natural" tick of the
>> hardware...
>
>
Dear Simon Glass,
In message you wrote:
>
> I do think it would be nice to put a time_ prefix before all the time
> functions, but this is a pretty minor point.
Agree.
By now, I also find get_timer() kind of misleading - one might expect
from that name that it allocates one of (eventually sever
Dear Reinhard Meyer,
In message <4de47046.3010...@emk-elektronik.de> you wrote:
>
> Excuse me, but THIS API does not prevent the user to do a
> "(get_timer() - start) < timeout" inside the loop, making your argument moot.
You can be pretty sure that I will NAK any design that _prevents_ me
from
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message you wrote:
>
> Don't forget the API will have a get_current_ms() so we can do duration
I don't think we will have this.
We have get_timer() (or, as recently suggested, renamed it into
time_read() or similar). We don't need yet another function that
dioes the same j
Dear Reinhard Meyer,
In message <4de47ea1.1090...@emk-elektronik.de> you wrote:
>
> All you can throw into the timer discussion is critics and pointless remarks,
> but I miss any productive input from you except sometimes pointing out how
> powerpc does it.
Thanks you very much.
> We DO have mo
Thank you for answer,
I have a custom board where SD and dataflash are not exclusive - I
used 9260ek just for preliminary testing and did not check the
schematics.
2011/5/30 Reinhard Meyer :
> Dear Jan Pohanka,
>
>> I'm trying to get u-boot 2010.12 working on at91sam9260ek devkit with
>> mmc supp
Hi Wolfgang,
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Graeme Russ,
>
> In message you wrote:
>>
>> Don't forget the API will have a get_current_ms() so we can do duration
>
> I don't think we will have this.
>
> We have get_timer() (or, as recently suggested, renamed it into
Hi Wolfgang,
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Simon Glass,
>
> In message you wrote:
>>
>> I do think it would be nice to put a time_ prefix before all the time
>> functions, but this is a pretty minor point.
>
> Agree.
>
> By now, I also find get_timer() kind of misl
> going to be critical for boot profiling and I see no reason to think
> about it now rather than later.
going to be critical for boot profiling and I see no reason NOT to think
about it now rather than later.
Oops,
Regards,
Graeme
___
U-Boot mailing
45 matches
Mail list logo
