Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v6] POST cleanup.

2010-08-07 Thread Michael Zaidman
Dear Wolfgang, On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Michael Zaidman wrote: > - Revives POST for blackfin arch; > - Removes redundant code: >     arch/blackfin/lib/post.c >     board/ssv/common/post.c >     arch/powerpc/cpu/ppc4xx/commproc.c >     arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc512x/common.

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v6] POST cleanup.

2010-08-10 Thread Michael Zaidman
Dear Wolfgang, On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 11:30 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michael Zaidman, > >> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Michael Zaidman >> wrote: ... >> More than 5 week ago I rebased and resubmitted this patch as you asked >> but did not receive any res

[U-Boot] [PATCH V7] POST cleanup.

2010-09-20 Thread Michael Zaidman
- Revives POST for blackfin arch; - Removes redundant code: arch/blackfin/lib/post.c arch/powerpc/cpu/ppc4xx/commproc.c arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc512x/common.c - fixes up the post_word_{load|store} usage. Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman Acked-by: Detlev Zundel Tested-by: Anatolij

[U-Boot] [STATUS] v2010.09-rc2 is out / "next" branch available

2010-09-20 Thread Michael Zaidman
t/075227.html. Should I resubmit it into the "next" branch or it can go into the current release? Best regards, Michael Zaidman ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] DHCP regression on 2009-06

2009-07-14 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 9:40 PM, Robin Getz wrote: > > On Mon 13 Jul 2009 11:11, Michael Zaidman pondered: > > > I did verify that reverting the line exposes the bug that Michael fixed, > > > ... > > > > Ok, my target uses static IP configuration so I did not

[U-Boot] [PATCH] DHCP regression on 2009-06

2009-07-14 Thread Michael Zaidman
Fixed the DHCP/BOOTP/RARP regression introduced in u-boot-2009.06 by initializing our IP addr to 0 in order to accept any IP addr assigned to us by the DHCP/BOOTP/RARP server. Ack-by: Robin Getz Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman --- net/net.c |3 +++ 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0

Re: [U-Boot] DHCP regression on 2009-06

2009-07-14 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 5:57 PM, Ben Warren wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 2:26 AM, Michael Zaidman > wrote: >> >> If nobody has objections I can submit this fix. >> >> Michael. > > Please do. > > regards, > Ben > Done. http://lists.denx

[U-Boot] POST related question

2010-02-10 Thread Michael Zaidman
Hello, 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 – PASS or FAIL) in addition to the conventional console output. Such indicatio

Re: [U-Boot] POST related question

2010-02-10 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Michael Zaidman wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > > Dear Michael Zaidman, > > > > In message <660c0f821002100159i1a956edfx1c76945042f51...@

Re: [U-Boot] POST related question

2010-02-10 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michael Zaidman, > > In message <660c0f821002100159i1a956edfx1c76945042f51...@mail.gmail.com> you wrote: >> SGVsbG8sCgpXb3JraW5nIG9uIHRoZSBQT1NUIGZvciBvdXIgYm9hcmQgKHdoaWNoIEkgYW0gZ29p ... > > Please do not se

Re: [U-Boot] POST related question

2010-02-11 Thread Michael Zaidman
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

Re: [U-Boot] POST related question

2010-02-11 Thread Michael Zaidman
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

Re: [U-Boot] POST related question

2010-02-11 Thread Michael Zaidman
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

[U-Boot] The post_list array order change

2010-02-14 Thread Michael Zaidman
Hi Detlev, In continuation to my post where I explained necessity of user defined post_progress_status facility (see. http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-February/067662.html) I am looking now for the best way of causing the diagnostics output interface test to be run first. In my case it i

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Bug: do_reset issued via netconsole does not reset mpc83xx cpu.

2010-02-14 Thread Michael Zaidman
The do_reset routine in the cpu/mpc83xx/cpu.c file does not reset the mpc83xx cpu when issued via netconsole. Moving the console output "resetting the board." to the beginning of the routine before disabling interrupts solved the problem. Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman --- cpu/mpc

[U-Boot] [PATCH] tsec.c bug: Every key typing in netconsole prints the Eth link mode

2010-02-15 Thread Michael Zaidman
e eth_init routine called at every netloop entry. The solution: Do not print the string when compiled with CONFIG_NETCONSOLE and stdin or stdout is set to "nc" Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman --- drivers/net/tsec.c | 10 ++ 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff

Re: [U-Boot] The post_list array order change

2010-02-15 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Detlev Zundel wrote: > Hi Michael, > >> In continuation to my post where I explained necessity >> of user defined post_progress_status facility >> (see. http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-February/067662.html) >> I am looking now for the best way of causin

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] tsec.c bug: Every key typing in netconsole prints the Eth link mode

2010-02-15 Thread Michael Zaidman
used at all. On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Michael Zaidman wrote: > The problem description: > The Ethernet link operation mode printing (such as "Speed: 1000, > full duplex") accomplishes every key typing when communicating via > netconsole to the mpc834x based board. Th

[U-Boot] The ctrlc() does not work when used from post_hotkeys_pressed()

2010-02-16 Thread Michael Zaidman
Hello, Working on the POST for mpc834x based board I encountered  the following problem: The ctrlc() routine does not work when used from post_hotkeys_pressed(). The value of ctrlc_disabled variable defined as static in the console.c file is lost after code relocation. By adding the ctrlc_disable

Re: [U-Boot] The post_list array order change

2010-02-16 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 10:32 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michael Zaidman, > > In message <660c0f821002150322g34255468re9cf03d2ed493...@mail.gmail.com> you > wrote: >> >> > Just out of interest, what exactly do you test there?  Do you have >> > any

Re: [U-Boot] The post_list array order change

2010-02-16 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michael Zaidman, > > In message <660c0f821002160239w30d02211k66cd1df24c987...@mail.gmail.com> you > wrote: >> >> >> The test blinks the LEDs few times and performs running "1" >&

Re: [U-Boot] The ctrlc() does not work when used from post_hotkeys_pressed()

2010-02-16 Thread Michael Zaidman
Dear Wolfgang, > Please send plain text only. Sorry for inconvenience but it is what I am actually trying to do from within my gmail. Very strange... wrote: >> >> Working on the POST for mpc834x based board I encountered  the following >> problem: >> The ctrlc() routine does not work when used f

Re: [U-Boot] The ctrlc() does not work when used from post_hotkeys_pressed()

2010-02-16 Thread Michael Zaidman
Dear Wolfgang, On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: >> >> > As mentioned before, the POST code is supposed to be NOT interactive. >> >> Then how we supposed to switch the POST_SLOWTEST mode? >> >> Is the proprietary HW button scanning implemented in post_hotkeys_pressed() >> of s

Re: [U-Boot] The post_list array order change

2010-02-16 Thread Michael Zaidman
Dear Wolfgang, On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: >> In order to relate on this indication we must be sure it is operating >> correctly. >> It could be done by observing diagnostics LEDs performing running "1" pattern >> or any different algorithm which user is expected. Only

Re: [U-Boot] extracting u-boot version from Linux

2010-02-19 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear "Parks, Derek", > > In message > <821b2170e9e7f04fa38df7ec21de487119ef6...@vcaexch01.hq.corp.viasat.com> you > wrote: >> >> I have an c++ application that needs to display various versions of >> system components; u-boot, kernel, O/S

[U-Boot] The abortboot routine misses key hits issued via netconsole.

2010-02-24 Thread Michael Zaidman
Hello, The "Hit any key to stop autoboot:" of abortboot routine misses the key hits issued via netconsole. It happens due to delays of 10ms used to count passed seconds in the abortboot routine of main.c file. All key events arrived asynchronously during these delays are lost. I solved it localy

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Cosmetic change - indentation correction.

2010-02-28 Thread Michael Zaidman
Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman --- common/miiphyutil.c |4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/common/miiphyutil.c b/common/miiphyutil.c index 196ef4a..e5bf2fb 100644 --- a/common/miiphyutil.c +++ b/common/miiphyutil.c @@ -377,7 +377,7 @@ int miiphy_speed

[U-Boot] [PATCH] POST progress API

2010-03-01 Thread Michael Zaidman
Added POST progress API implemented as weak calls before and after each call to the POST test callback in the post_run_single routine of the post.c file. Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman --- include/post.h |5 + post/post.c| 17 +++-- 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 2

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] POST progress API

2010-03-16 Thread Michael Zaidman
run_single routine >> of the post.c file. >> >> Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman > > Acked-by: Detlev Zundel > > Cheers >  Detlev Thanks, Michael ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] serial init

2010-03-18 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Valentin Ecker wrote: ... > While board initialization, serial_init() gets called, which calls the > driver specific (hardware, etc...) init stuff. The default is that the > default serial (in my case the SoC ns16550 ) will be initialized. So > my extra serial por

Re: [U-Boot] serial init

2010-03-18 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Valentin Ecker wrote: > well, i don't want to use the second com port of the ns16550. Im using an > external serial chip over EMIF. I am not familiar with Davinci architecture and probably my case is completely different from yours but on our board we have dual ua

Re: [U-Boot] serial init

2010-03-18 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Valentin Ecker wrote: > I see...I think we have a very similar setup, and I see how you init your > ports. Although I'm not sure if this is suitable for me, since editing the > ns16550-files to support/init an external COM-chip is not a really > clean/nice implemen

Re: [U-Boot] The abortboot routine misses key hits issued via netconsole.

2010-03-21 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michael Zaidman, > > In message <660c0f821002240238t71a6d793we93747bbb8bb8...@mail.gmail.com> you > wrote: >> >> The "Hit any key to stop autoboot:" of abortboot routine misses >> the key

Re: [U-Boot] The abortboot routine misses key hits issued via netconsole.

2010-03-21 Thread Michael Zaidman
> capturing to ~ 90% but not eliminate the key misses completely. Small correction - more than 99,9% - ration between 1 second and 100 times of loop overhead. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] POST progress API

2010-03-21 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michael Zaidman, > > In message <660c0f821003160321h1a5552dfh6cc835b48b004...@mail.gmail.com> you > wrote: >> >> Is there a chance this patch will be included already in this release? > > Sorry, b

[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] Serial support extended up to 6 COMs

2010-03-22 Thread Michael Zaidman
Added support for extra ns16550 chip extending total number of supported COMs up to 6. This targets the cases when due to the insufficient number of UART ports on the CPU chip designers are forced to put additional ns16550 chip on board. Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman --- drivers/serial

[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] Added serial loopback tests accessible via CLI and POST

2010-03-22 Thread Michael Zaidman
Serial loopback internal/external tests. Is based on my previous commit 078a9c4898e7802086b362baa44ad48b8ad1baed Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman --- drivers/serial/serial.c | 87 +++ post/drivers/Makefile |2 +- post/drivers/serial.c | 56

Re: [U-Boot] serial init

2010-03-22 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Michael Zaidman wrote: > On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Valentin Ecker > wrote: >> I see...I think we have a very similar setup, and I see how you init your >> ports. Although I'm not sure if this is suitable for me, since editing

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] Serial support extended up to 6 COMs

2010-03-23 Thread Michael Zaidman
Dear Wolfgand, On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 10:04 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michael Zaidman, > > In message <1269267840-15285-1-git-send-email-michael.zaid...@gmail.com> you > wrote: >> Added support for extra ns16550 chip extending total number of >> supported

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] Added serial loopback tests accessible via CLI and POST

2010-03-23 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 10:14 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michael Zaidman, > > In message <1269267894-15324-1-git-send-email-michael.zaid...@gmail.com> you > wrote: >> Serial loopback internal/external tests. Is based on my previous commit >> 078a9c4898e7802086b

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] Added serial loopback tests accessible via CLI and POST

2010-03-23 Thread Michael Zaidman
Dear Wolfgang, On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: [snip] > Then what is the "uart[t]est" command needed for? For two reasons: 1) It gets parameters such internal/external loopback and COM number while "diag run uart" performs only local loopback through all COMs. Thus, it ca

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] Serial support extended up to 6 COMs

2010-03-23 Thread Michael Zaidman
Dear Wolfgang, On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michael Zaidman, > > In message <660c0f821003230108t579e90femaac28b937e043...@mail.gmail.com> you > wrote: > >> All these chips are treated in the same way by this patch. Only >> f

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] Added serial loopback tests accessible via CLI and POST

2010-03-31 Thread Michael Zaidman
Dear Wolfgang, On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > > I think this is a consequence of trying to squeeze soemthing into a > framework which doesn't fit.  POST and production test code should be > kept separate. If they share common code, fine. > > Best regards, > > Wolfgang De

[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] The BUILD_BUG_ON macros moved from ubi_uboot.h to common.h

2010-04-01 Thread Michael Zaidman
The BUILD_BUG_ON macros made availible for rest of the u-boot code by moving it from ubi_uboot.h to common.h. In Linux kernel this widely used macros is defined in kernel.h file. Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman --- include/common.h|3 +++ include/ubi_uboot.h |3 --- 2 files changed

[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] drivers/serial/serial.c: code maintainability improvments.

2010-04-01 Thread Michael Zaidman
Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman --- drivers/serial/serial.c | 31 +-- 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/serial/serial.c b/drivers/serial/serial.c index dd5f332..8d78983 100644 --- a/drivers/serial/serial.c +++ b/drivers/serial

[U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] serial.c: get_serial_port and get_number_of_serial_ports API added.

2010-04-01 Thread Michael Zaidman
Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman --- drivers/serial/serial.c | 10 ++ 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/serial/serial.c b/drivers/serial/serial.c index 8d78983..c123803 100644 --- a/drivers/serial/serial.c +++ b/drivers/serial/serial.c @@ -340,3

[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3 v2] drivers/serial/serial.c: code maintainability improvments.

2010-04-02 Thread Michael Zaidman
Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman --- drivers/serial/serial.c | 27 +-- 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/serial/serial.c b/drivers/serial/serial.c index dd5f332..ba88cb0 100644 --- a/drivers/serial/serial.c +++ b/drivers/serial

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] drivers/serial/serial.c: code maintainability improvments.

2010-04-02 Thread Michael Zaidman
Hi Kim, Thanks for your corrections. I fixed all of them in version #2 of the patch here: http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-April/069412.html Regards, Michael ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] The BUILD_BUG_ON macros moved from ubi_uboot.h to common.h

2010-04-02 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Thursday 01 April 2010 13:16:53 Michael Zaidman wrote: >> The BUILD_BUG_ON macros made availible for rest of the u-boot code >> by moving it from ubi_uboot.h to common.h. In Linux kernel this >> widely used macros i

[U-Boot] [PATCH] POST: Added ECC memory test for mpc83xx.

2010-04-02 Thread Michael Zaidman
)/post/rules.mk diff --git a/post/cpu/mpc83xx/ecc.c b/post/cpu/mpc83xx/ecc.c new file mode 100644 index 000..83dfcf6 --- /dev/null +++ b/post/cpu/mpc83xx/ecc.c @@ -0,0 +1,160 @@ +/* + * (C) Copyright 2010 + * Eastman Kodak Company, + * Michael Zaidman, + * + * The code is based on the cpu

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] The BUILD_BUG_ON macros moved from ubi_uboot.h to common.h

2010-04-03 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 9:22 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: >> >> The common.h includes image.h which includes compiler.h, so >> technically it should works also. > > you're looking the wrong direction.  host tools include compiler.h, they dont > include common.h. It was clear to me. I meant the u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] The BUILD_BUG_ON macros moved from ubi_uboot.h to common.h

2010-04-05 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Saturday 03 April 2010 04:23:58 Michael Zaidman wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 9:22 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: >> >> I have a doubt however -  what about location of similar staff such as >> >> BUG, BUG

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] POST: Added ECC memory test for mpc83xx.

2010-04-06 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 3:22 AM, Timur Tabi wrote: > On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Michael Zaidman > wrote: > >> +inline static void ecc_clear(volatile ddr83xx_t *ddr) > > Please use I/O accessors instead of "volatile". > > -- > Timur Tabi > Lin

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] POST: Added ECC memory test for mpc83xx.

2010-04-06 Thread Michael Zaidman
>> Rewriting code to use accessors API added 56 bytes or 14 opcodes. It >> doubled the routine's execution time. The routine is called in the >> loop per each ecc word, that significantly increased execution time of >> the ECC POST test and consequently board startup time. > > If this is really a p

[U-Boot] [PATCH v2] POST: Added ECC memory test for mpc83xx.

2010-04-07 Thread Michael Zaidman
Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman --- post/cpu/mpc83xx/Makefile | 30 post/cpu/mpc83xx/ecc.c| 167 + 2 files changed, 197 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 post/cpu/mpc83xx/Makefile create mode 100644 post/cpu/mpc83xx

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] POST: Added ECC memory test for mpc83xx.

2010-04-07 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 3:40 AM, Kim Phillips wrote: > On Tue, 6 Apr 2010 18:29:08 +0300 > Michael Zaidman wrote: > >> >> Rewriting code to use accessors API added 56 bytes or 14 opcodes. It >> >> doubled the routine's execution time. The routine is call

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] POST: Added ECC memory test for mpc83xx.

2010-04-07 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Timur Tabi wrote: > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Michael Zaidman > wrote: > >> The version #2 of the patch is located here >> http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-April/069579.html > > What is ppcDWstore(), and why do you

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] POST: Added ECC memory test for mpc83xx.

2010-04-07 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 7:01 PM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: >> >> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Timur Tabi wrote: >> > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Michael Zaidman >> > wrote: >> > >> >> The version #2 of the patch is located here >> &

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] POST: Added ECC memory test for mpc83xx.

2010-04-16 Thread Michael Zaidman
ithout depending on its position in the data_error_inject_hi or data_error_inject_lo injection mask registers. The second ecc capture data word will hold the data that was in the memory right before the ppcDWstore call. Thus, the test validation while working for stfd will fail for stw x 2. So, the al

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] mpc83xx: turn on icache in core initialization to improve u-boot boot time

2010-04-16 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 1:36 AM, Kim Phillips wrote: > before, MPC8349ITX boots u-boot in 4.3sec: [snip] > after, MPC8349ITX boots u-boot in 3.0sec: Thanks for the good news! Memory POST test on my board with icach disabled was lasting for hours until I enabled icach locally before and disabled i

[U-Boot] [RFC] PPC: post_word_{load/store} - eliminate redundant code

2010-04-19 Thread Michael Zaidman
Hi All, In order to eliminate redundant code for powerPC architecture when defining post_word_{load/store} routines I suggest moving them into the arch/ppc/lib/commproc.c file rather than adding them to every arch/ppc/cpu/. Also, defining them with weak attribute will permit overriding them f

[U-Boot] [PATCH] PPC: define post_word_{load/store} for all PPC boards.

2010-04-20 Thread Michael Zaidman
Defining the post_word_{load/store} routines in the ppc common code eliminates the necessity to redefine them for each of the ppc CPUs or boards. Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman --- arch/ppc/lib/Makefile |1 + arch/ppc/lib/commproc.c | 54

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] POST: Added ECC memory test for mpc83xx.

2010-04-20 Thread Michael Zaidman
>> Michael, can you resubmit something more comprehensive, something that >> builds for 83xx with CONFIG_POST turned on? >> > Sure. > Please see this patch: http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-April/070319.html -michael ___ U-Boot mailing list U-B

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC] PPC: post_word_{load/store} - eliminate redundant code

2010-04-20 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 7:44 PM, Michael Zaidman wrote: > Hi All, > > In order to eliminate redundant code for powerPC architecture when > defining post_word_{load/store} routines I suggest  moving them into > the arch/ppc/lib/commproc.c file rather than adding them to every >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] POST: Added ECC memory test for mpc83xx.

2010-04-20 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: >> >> Michael Zaidman wrote on 2010/04/16 18:44:12: >> > >> > On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 1:25 AM, Kim Phillips >> > wrote: >> > > On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 10:37:08 +0200 >> > > Joak

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC] PPC: post_word_{load/store} - eliminate redundant code

2010-04-21 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 12:39 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michael Zaidman, > > In message > you wrote: >> >> In order to eliminate redundant code for powerPC architecture when >> defining post_word_{load/store} routines I suggest  moving them into >> the

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] PPC: define post_word_{load/store} for all PPC boards.

2010-04-21 Thread Michael Zaidman
Link to the related thread: http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-April/070263.html ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC] PPC: post_word_{load/store} - eliminate redundant code

2010-04-21 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 12:39 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michael Zaidman, > > In message > you wrote: >> >> In order to eliminate redundant code for powerPC architecture when >> defining post_word_{load/store} routines I suggest  moving them into >> the

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC] PPC: post_word_{load/store} - eliminate redundant code

2010-04-21 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Stefan Roese wrote: > Hi Michael, > > On Wednesday 21 April 2010 15:24:15 Michael Zaidman wrote: >> >> In order to eliminate redundant code for powerPC architecture when >> >> defining post_word_{load/store} routines I suggest  mo

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC] PPC: post_word_{load/store} - eliminate redundant code

2010-04-21 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > > Actually there are two parts to it: > > bootcount_store() and bootcount_load() are needed for the boot > counter, a generic feature; I tend to move these into > arch/powerpc/lib/bootcount.c; the code also needs to be rewritten to > use I/O

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC] PPC: post_word_{load/store} - eliminate redundant code

2010-04-21 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 12:40 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Looking at the code I wonder why we need post_word_store() and > post_word_load() functions at all. All implementations I have found > translate into a single ioread32() resp. iowrite32() call. > Probably, due to big and little endians that

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC] PPC: post_word_{load/store} - eliminate redundant code

2010-04-22 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: >> >> > Looking at the code I wonder why we need post_word_store() and >> > post_word_load() functions at all. All implementations I have found >> > translate into a single ioread32() resp. iowrite32() call. >> > >> Probably, due to big and li

[U-Boot] bf537-stamp board compilation problem

2010-04-23 Thread Michael Zaidman
Hi, Compiling the bf537-stamp board I got the following linker error: /home/mike/develop/u-boot/u-boot-patch/common/cmd_mmc.c:53: undefined reference to `mmc_legacy_init' /home/mike/develop/u-boot/u-boot-patch/common/cmd_mmc.c:53: relocation truncated to fit: R_pcrel24 against undefined symbol `mmc

Re: [U-Boot] bf537-stamp board compilation problem

2010-04-23 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Friday 23 April 2010 10:10:16 Michael Zaidman wrote: >> Compiling the bf537-stamp board I got the following linker error: >> /home/mike/develop/u-boot/u-boot-patch/common/cmd_mmc.c:53: undefined >> reference to `mmc_

Re: [U-Boot] bf537-stamp board compilation problem

2010-04-23 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 6:37 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Friday 23 April 2010 11:21:28 Michael Zaidman wrote: >> BTW, looking on the blackfin POST implementation I wonder if it was >> used recently. Enabling POST on the bf537-stamp board caused the >> post_list array

[U-Boot] [PATCH 0/2] POST cleanup

2010-04-23 Thread Michael Zaidman
The patches implement first 2 steps of POST framework cleanup suggested by Wolfgang Denk in the http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-April/070400.html Michael Zaidman (2): The bootcount_{store|load} moved to arch specific generic locations. Blackfin: POST: revive, sync to main stream

[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] The bootcount_{store|load} moved to arch specific generic locations.

2010-04-23 Thread Michael Zaidman
Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman Suggested-by: Wolfgang Denk --- arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc8260/commproc.c | 24 arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc8260/cpu.c | 24 arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc8xx/commproc.c | 26 -- arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc8xx

[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] Blackfin: POST: revive, sync to main stream, cleanup.

2010-04-23 Thread Michael Zaidman
1) post/post.c instead of arch/blackfin/lib/post.c 2) Alternative post_list support. Suggested-by: Wolfgang Denk Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman --- arch/blackfin/lib/Makefile|2 +- arch/blackfin/lib/board.c |1 - arch/blackfin/lib/post.c | 421

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/2] POST cleanup

2010-04-24 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 11:31 PM, Anatolij Gustschin wrote: > Hello Michael, > > On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 22:06:09 +0300 > Michael Zaidman wrote: > >> The patches implement first 2 steps of POST framework cleanup >> suggested by Wolfgang Denk in the >> http://lists.de

Re: [U-Boot] bf537-stamp board compilation problem

2010-04-24 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 10:30 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Mike Frysinger, > > In message <201004231137.16732.vap...@gentoo.org> you wrote: >> >> because the post/ dir has historically been ppc-only (literally sprinkled >> with >> code that would not compile for any other arch), we were filter

[U-Boot] [PATCH V2] POST cleanup V2 (incremental)

2010-04-27 Thread Michael Zaidman
-off-by: Michael Zaidman --- arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc8260/commproc.c | 20 arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc85xx/commproc.c | 20 arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc8xx/commproc.c | 20 arch/powerpc/cpu/ppc4xx/Makefile|1 - arch/powerpc/cpu/ppc4xx/commproc.c | 53

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] powerpc: Consolidate bootcount_{store|load} for PowerPC

2010-04-27 Thread Michael Zaidman
* 32bit) to store the bootcounter > b) Use only 1 word (2* 16bit) to store the bootcounter > > Version b) was already used by MPC5xxx. > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Roese > Cc: Michael Zaidman > Cc: Wolfgang Denk > Cc: Kim Phillips > Cc: Anatolij Gustschin > --- >  a

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] The bootcount_{store|load} moved to arch specific generic locations.

2010-04-27 Thread Michael Zaidman
This patch may be replaced by the http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-April/070683.html patch what should not break an application of the POST cleanup V2 incremental patch http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-April/070729.html Regards, Michael _

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] powerpc: Consolidate bootcount_{store|load} for PowerPC

2010-04-28 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Stefan Roese wrote: > Hi Michael, > > On Tuesday 27 April 2010 17:56:27 Michael Zaidman wrote: >> It makes sense to keep some measure of flexibility by giving to the >> user possibility to override the CONFIG_SYS_BOOTCOUNT_ADDR definition

[U-Boot] [PATCH v3] POST cleanup v3 (incremental)

2010-05-02 Thread Michael Zaidman
: Michael Zaidman --- include/configs/hcu4.h |2 +- include/post.h | 18 +- 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/configs/hcu4.h b/include/configs/hcu4.h index b01f8b1..26992e7 100644 --- a/include/configs/hcu4.h +++ b/include/configs/hcu4

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v4 6/8] mpc5121: add support for PDM360NG board

2010-05-09 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Anatolij Gustschin wrote: > PDM360NG is a MPC5121E based board by ifm ecomatic gmbh. > [snip] +#define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_RAM_ENDCONFIG_SYS_SRAM_SIZE /* End of area */ + +#define CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE 0x100 /* num bytes of initial data */

[U-Boot] [PATCH v4] POST cleanup.

2010-05-09 Thread Michael Zaidman
arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc512x/common.c - fixes up the post_word_{load|store} usage; Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman --- arch/blackfin/lib/Makefile |2 +- arch/blackfin/lib/board.c |1 - arch/blackfin/lib/post.c| 421 --- arch

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v4] POST cleanup.

2010-05-10 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Detlev Zundel wrote: > Hi Michael, > >> Combine previously submitted POST cleanup patch series >> into single patch. Fix plain POST support introduced recently >> for mpc812x arch. >> >> - Revives POST for blackfin arch; >> - Removes redundant code: >>      arch/bl

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v4] POST cleanup.

2010-05-10 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Anatolij Gustschin wrote: ... > mpc512x related changes are OK. I tested them on mpc5121 > based pdm360ng board. Thanks again for this work! > For mpc5121 part you can add > Tested-by: Anatolij Gustschin > Ok, thanks for testing. Michael _

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v4] POST cleanup.

2010-05-10 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Detlev Zundel wrote: > > It would have been really nice if you put the maintainers on CC (simply > include a CC: ... in the patch git-send-email does the rest) of the > boards that you change config files.  This way they knew that there was > a change which they sh

[U-Boot] [PATCH v5] POST cleanup.

2010-05-10 Thread Michael Zaidman
arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc512x/common.c - fixes up the post_word_{load|store} usage; Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman Acked-by: Detlev Zundel Tested-by: Anatolij Gustschin List of the maintainers of the affected by patch boards: Cc: Stephan Linz Cc: Travis Sawyer Cc: Denis Peter Cc: Matthias Fuchs

[U-Boot] [RFC] General purpose utilities - cleanup

2010-05-12 Thread Michael Zaidman
While looking for more appropriate place for the BUILD_BUG_ON macros than its ubi_uboot.h current location (see the http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-April/069391.html thread) I realized the following: 1. There is necessity in general purpose utilities like those that Linux defines in

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v4] POST cleanup.

2010-05-12 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Detlev Zundel wrote: > Hi Michael, > diff --git a/board/barco/barco.c b/board/barco/barco.c index c5fe8c4..2d01f1b 100644 --- a/board/barco/barco.c +++ b/board/barco/barco.c @@ -348,12 +348,3 @@ int serial_tstc (void)  {       ret

[U-Boot] [PATCH] NetLoop initialization bug

2009-03-22 Thread Michael Zaidman
case RARP: RarpTry = 0; + NetOurIP = 0; RarpRequest (); break; #if defined(CONFIG_CMD_PING) Regards, Michael Zaidman, michael.zaid...@kodak.com ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

[U-Boot] [PATCH] drivers/net/tsec.c - mii_parse_sr does not wait for auto-negotiation completion bug fix

2009-03-24 Thread Michael Zaidman
: Michael Zaidman --- drivers/net/tsec.c |2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/tsec.c b/drivers/net/tsec.c index 399116f..54279ca 100644 --- a/drivers/net/tsec.c +++ b/drivers/net/tsec.c @@ -363,7 +363,7 @@ uint mii_parse_sr(uint mii_reg, struct

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] drivers/net/tsec.c - mii_parse_sr does not wait for auto-negotiation completion bug fix

2009-03-26 Thread Michael Zaidman
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 9:01 PM, Peter Tyser wrote: > Hi Michael, > > On Tue, 2009-03-24 at 19:57 +0200, Michael Zaidman wrote: >> drivers/net/tsec.c - mii_parse_sr does not wait for auto-negotiation >> completion bug fix >> >> In the case when the MIIM_STATUS_L

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] drivers/net/tsec.c - mii_parse_sr does not wait for auto-negotiation completion bug fix

2009-03-26 Thread Michael Zaidman
y eyes on something concrete:) Sure, you can download it from http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/802.3.html All auto-negotiation stuff is located in the "IEEE 802.3-2005 -- Section Two" > >>     So I reduced the PHY_AUTONEGOTIATE_TIMEOUT to be 4000 ms. >> >>     Her

[U-Boot] [PATCH] NetLoop initialization bug

2009-03-27 Thread Michael Zaidman
Hi Heiko, The patch "netloop: speed up NetLoop" you delivered into the u-boot-2009.03 introduced bug I have described below a few days ago. Could you please take a look at the proposed fix? Thanks, Michael -- Forwarded message ------ From: Michael Zaidman Date: Sun, Mar 2

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] NetLoop initialization bug

2009-03-30 Thread Michael Zaidman
Hello Heiko, Please see my comments and updated patch below. On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 7:12 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote: > Hello Michael, > > Michael Zaidman wrote: >> Hi Heiko, >> >> The patch "netloop: speed up NetLoop" you delivered >> into the u-b

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] NetLoop initialization bug

2009-03-31 Thread Michael Zaidman
reation. Thanks, Michael >From 8cc38fd564c0671b34afdc36df4c224d51d98334 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Michael Zaidman Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:21:35 +0300 Subject: [PATCH] The patch fixes the bug of partial intialization of global network parameters. Upon u-boot's start up the first ping c

  1   2   >