On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: > Dear Otavio Salvador, > >> On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >> > Dear Otavio Salvador, >> > >> >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 9:27 PM, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >> >> > This patch adds support for MX23-based Olinuxino board. >> >> > >> >> > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> >> >> > Cc: Fabio Estevam <fabio.este...@freescale.com> >> >> > Cc: Otavio Salvador <ota...@ossystems.com.br> >> >> > Cc: Stefano Babic <sba...@denx.de> >> >> > --- >> >> > >> >> > MAINTAINERS | 1 + >> >> > board/olimex/mx23_olinuxino/Makefile | 47 +++++++++ >> >> > board/olimex/mx23_olinuxino/mx23_olinuxino.c | 51 ++++++++++ >> >> > board/olimex/mx23_olinuxino/spl_boot.c | 90 +++++++++++++++++ >> >> > boards.cfg | 1 + >> >> > include/configs/mx23_olinuxino.h | 133 >> >> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 6 files changed, 323 insertions(+) >> >> > create mode 100644 board/olimex/mx23_olinuxino/Makefile >> >> > create mode 100644 board/olimex/mx23_olinuxino/mx23_olinuxino.c >> >> > create mode 100644 board/olimex/mx23_olinuxino/spl_boot.c >> >> > create mode 100644 include/configs/mx23_olinuxino.h >> >> > >> >> > V2: Add MAINTAINERS entry >> >> > >> >> > Remove CONFIG_MACH_TYPE (as this board is DT-only) >> >> >> >> In fact it is not DT-only; we support it in linux-imx inside of OE and >> >> the images provided by Olinex are also based 2.6.35 so it seems better >> >> to define the machine type. >> > >> > Can be added in a subsequent patch. >> > [...] >> >> I don't think it is the way to go for several reasons, mainly: >> >> * your v1 had this support > > 0xffffffff is DT boot ID really. > >> * all sdcards provided by olimex use 2.6.35 kernel (until now) >> * the FSL supported kernel is non-DT >> >> So I see no reason to not fix the patch, seriously. > > Can you provide pointer to olinuxino machine entry in RMK's ID database then > please?
+imx233_olinuxino MACH_IMX233_OLINUXINO IMX233_OLINUXINO 4105 This is from the board patch. >> >> > +/* >> >> > + * U-Boot general configurations >> >> > + */ >> >> > +#define CONFIG_SYS_LONGHELP >> >> > +#define CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT "=> " >> >> > +#define CONFIG_SYS_CBSIZE 1024 /* Console I/O >> >> > buffer size */ >> >> >> >> The SYS_CBSIZE might be smaller I think; we use 256 in sabresd and >> >> others which have a much bigger environment so I think it could be >> >> reduced. >> > >> > Can you elaborate what issues this causes please? >> >> It causes nothing except more memory allocation than need. As other >> bords work fine with less it seems a good option to move to a smaller >> value. Just it. > > It reduces the size of console buffer, right? AFAIK yes. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems E-mail: ota...@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
