2008/10/24 Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Dear Alan, > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: >> >> > Last time Scott Wood suggested to use nand_spl you replied "I think using >> > nand_spl is the best approach, but it will needs more effort to complete." >> > and "Anyway, right now we can have iMX31PDK booting with this code as an >> > option for users willing to use U-Boot in this board." So, what's the >> > status of this effort? If this your new submission, which still doesn't >> > use nand_spl is not really targeted for upstream merge, I think, it would >> > be better not to mark these mails "PATCH". Or have I missed anything? >> > >> >> This patch is just a rebase of previous patch, to be merged on >> u-boot-arm/master repository. > > It will not be merged to arm/master ... > >> I don't have nand_spl working until now. > > ...because we are waiting for nand_spl code. > >> I am new sending patches to u-boot mailing list. So what is the >> problem when calling it of "PATCH"? Please, let me know about my >> mistake, can you explain about it? > > The problem is that we told you we will only add code that fits intop > the existing framework, i. e. nand_spl
Where can one find developer documentation for nand_spl? Also, is there any ARM board supporting this already? The nand_spl for the i.MX31 has to fit within 2048 bytes, along with some of the usual low_levelinit.S stuff. /Magnus _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
