This patchset include minor changes for i.MX; mainly:
1/3: improves the rare case of unkown booting machine
2/3: generalize the code so it works for i.MX23 and i.MX28
The patch 3/3 is what we've been using in Yocto and has been change to
affect only mx28evk.
Otavio Salvador (3):
imx: Use a c
In case an unidentified CPU type is detected it now returns
i.MX, in a const char.
Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador
Cc: Marek Vasut
Cc: Stefano Babic
Cc: Fabio Estevam
---
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/imx-common/cpu.c |4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu
The information now is gathered from HW_DIGCTL_CHIPID register and
includes the revision of the chip on the output.
Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador
Cc: Marek Vasut
Cc: Stefano Babic
Cc: Fabio Estevam
---
arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mx28/mx28.c | 29 +++--
1 file changed, 2
The environment has been based on mx53loco and m28evk but keeping the
possibility to easy change the default console device as Freescale and
mainline kernels differ on the device name.
Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador
Cc: Marek Vasut
Cc: Stefano Babic
Cc: Wolfgang Denk
Cc: Fabio Estevam
---
in
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Otavio Salvador
wrote:
> -static char *get_imx_type(u32 imxtype)
> +static const char *get_imx_type(u32 imxtype)
This is OK, but ...
> {
> switch (imxtype) {
> case 0x63:
> @@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ static char *get_imx_type(u32 imxtype)
> case 0x53
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
>> default:
>> - return "unknown";
>> + return "";
>
> I really don't see any improvement here.
It is just to avoid a i.MXunkown return; besides this is how I am
doing in the mx23 code too.
--
Otavio Salva
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Otavio Salvador
wrote:
> The information now is gathered from HW_DIGCTL_CHIPID register and
> includes the revision of the chip on the output.
>
> Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador
> Cc: Marek Vasut
> Cc: Stefano Babic
> Cc: Fabio Estevam
> ---
> arch/arm/cpu/arm
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Otavio Salvador
wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
>>> default:
>>> - return "unknown";
>>> + return "";
>>
>> I really don't see any improvement here.
>
> It is just to avoid a i.MXunkown return; be
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Reading "i.MX" will make things no better.
OK; I'll drop it from the patch queue then.
--
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems
E-mail: ota...@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Otavio Salvador
wrote:
> #if defined(CONFIG_DISPLAY_CPUINFO)
> +static const char *get_cpu_type(void)
> +{
> + struct mx28_digctl_regs *digctl_regs =
> + (struct mx28_digctl_regs *)MXS_DIGCTL_BASE;
> +
> + switch (readl(&digctl_regs->hw_
Dear Otavio Salvador,
> The information now is gathered from HW_DIGCTL_CHIPID register and
> includes the revision of the chip on the output.
>
> Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador
> Cc: Marek Vasut
> Cc: Stefano Babic
> Cc: Fabio Estevam
> ---
> arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mx28/mx28.c | 29 +++
Dear Fabio Estevam,
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Otavio Salvador
>
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> >>>default:
> >>> - return "unknown";
> >>> + return "";
> >>
> >> I really don't see any improvement here.
> >
>
Dear Fabio Estevam,
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Otavio Salvador
>
> wrote:
> > #if defined(CONFIG_DISPLAY_CPUINFO)
> > +static const char *get_cpu_type(void)
> > +{
> > + struct mx28_digctl_regs *digctl_regs =
> > + (struct mx28_digctl_regs *)MXS_DIGCTL_BASE;
> > +
>
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> What's the code for mx6q? They dropped this register from it it seems ;-)
mx6 code does read the SoC type and revision correctly.
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/m
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Reading the Reference Manual I read 0x3780 instead.
Indeed; I must have typoed it when writting it back.
I fixed it locally; Fabio will check the masking for mx28 revision and
when I get it I update the patch according.
--
Otavio Salvado
Dear Otavio Salvador,
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> > Reading the Reference Manual I read 0x3780 instead.
>
> Indeed; I must have typoed it when writting it back.
>
> I fixed it locally; Fabio will check the masking for mx28 revision and
> when I get it I update the
Dear Wolfgang Denk,
> So, I cleaned up the ext2 filesystem code a bit. I tried to separate the
> changes to increase the reviewability.
>
> Marek Vasut (8):
> EXT2: Indent cleanup of dev.c
> EXT2: Indent cleanup ext2fs.c
> EXT2: Rework ext2fs_blockgroup() function
> EXT2: Rework ext2fs_re
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> I fixed it locally; Fabio will check the masking for mx28 revision and
>> when I get it I update the patch according.
>
> It's 0x2800 ... roll out a new version ;-)
We are in doubt about the revision, not product code ;-)
--
Otavio Salvado
On 17/06/2012 14:58, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> In case an unidentified CPU type is detected it now returns
> i.MX, in a const char.
>
> Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador
> Cc: Marek Vasut
> Cc: Stefano Babic
> Cc: Fabio Estevam
> ---
Hi Otavio,
> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/imx-common/cpu.c |4 ++--
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Stefano Babic wrote:
>> - return "unknown";
>> + return "";
>
> Taste ist taste... but why is better that unknown ?
For me it gives a visual indication that we didn't meant to support a
i.MXunknown processor ;-) i.MX make it easy to spot
On 17/06/2012 14:58, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> The information now is gathered from HW_DIGCTL_CHIPID register and
> includes the revision of the chip on the output.
>
> Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador
> Cc: Marek Vasut
> Cc: Stefano Babic
> Cc: Fabio Estevam
> ---
Hi Otavio,
> arch/arm/cpu/ar
Dear Stefano Babic,
> On 17/06/2012 14:58, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > The information now is gathered from HW_DIGCTL_CHIPID register and
> > includes the revision of the chip on the output.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador
> > Cc: Marek Vasut
> > Cc: Stefano Babic
> > Cc: Fabio Estevam
Dear Otavio Salvador,
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Stefano Babic wrote:
> >> - return "unknown";
> >> + return "";
> >
> > Taste ist taste... but why is better that unknown ?
>
> For me it gives a visual indication that we didn't meant to support a
> i.MXunknown
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Stefano Babic wrote:
> I like that there will be support for i.MX23, too. But I dislike that
> everything takes the name "MX28". As you suggest in your subject, maybe
> it is time to rename directories, and use "mxs" (as in kernel) instead
> of mx28.
I have it in
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> But really, I don't mind it being included or not. I did it because
>> Marek has comment about it when looking at my initial mx23 patches.
>
> And I like it more, it looks less like a typo.
Sorry; I didn't get what you meant ... should it go
On 17/06/2012 18:02, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> I like that there will be support for i.MX23, too. But I dislike that
>> everything takes the name "MX28". As you suggest in your subject, maybe
>> it is time to rename directories, and use "mxs" (as in kernel) instead
>> of mx28.
>
> We can do that even
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Stefano Babic wrote:
>> Correct, but isn't the return value mangled somehow (like having major rev.
>> <<
>> 16 and minor rev. << 0 )? Or that's only IMX?
>
> Checking in current implementations for get_cpu_rev() (i.MX / OMAP24 /
> OMAP3 / AM33, and even board/apo
Dear Stefano Babic,
> On 17/06/2012 18:02, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >> I like that there will be support for i.MX23, too. But I dislike that
> >> everything takes the name "MX28". As you suggest in your subject, maybe
> >> it is time to rename directories, and use "mxs" (as in kernel) instead
> >> of
On 17/06/2012 19:50, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> But really, I don't mind it being included or not. I did it because
>>> Marek has comment about it when looking at my initial mx23 patches.
>>
>> And I like it more, it looks less like a typo.
>
Dear Otavio Salvador,
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >> But really, I don't mind it being included or not. I did it because
> >> Marek has comment about it when looking at my initial mx23 patches.
> >
> > And I like it more, it looks less like a typo.
>
> Sorry; I didn'
Dear Stefano Babic,
> On 17/06/2012 19:50, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>> But really, I don't mind it being included or not. I did it because
> >>> Marek has comment about it when looking at my initial mx23 patches.
> >>
> >> And I like it mo
Dear Otavio Salvador,
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Stefano Babic wrote:
> >> Correct, but isn't the return value mangled somehow (like having major
> >> rev. << 16 and minor rev. << 0 )? Or that's only IMX?
> >
> > Checking in current implementations for get_cpu_rev() (i.MX / OMAP24 /
> >
Hello,
Is there a way to save environemnet in NVRAM ?
I did not find any information about that.
Best Regards,
Ran
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Dear Ran Shalit,
> Hello,
>
> Is there a way to save environemnet in NVRAM ?
> I did not find any information about that.
Check source ... common/env_nvram.c maybe ?
> Best Regards,
> Ran
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists
Dear Otavio Salvador,
> This patchset include minor changes for i.MX; mainly:
>
> 1/3: improves the rare case of unkown booting machine
The word's actually "unknown" ;-D
> 2/3: generalize the code so it works for i.MX23 and i.MX28
>
> The patch 3/3 is what we've been using in Yocto and has
On 06/15/2012 11:42 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On 06/07/2012 03:45 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> The Raspberry Pi model B uses the BCM2835 SoC, has 256MB of RAM, contains
>> an SMSC 9512 USB LAN/Hub chip, and various IO connectors. For more details,
>> see http://www.raspberrypi.org/.
> From: Stefano Babic [mailto:sba...@denx.de]
> MX53LOCO U-Boot > md 0xF800
> f800: 5f04dbd6 e0a62773 fa92b272 e85f7213..._s'..rr_.
> f810: 946065a3 fbe525ce 0cedf27e d2f2e4df.e`..%..~...
> f820: e7d76787 e8e97cfe 49927a97 d2b1a033.g...|...z.I3...
> f830: e
37 matches
Mail list logo