On Sat, 2009-07-11 at 01:07 +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Peter Tyser, > > In message <1247259105.32367.22.ca...@localhost.localdomain> you wrote: > > > > The only platforms the define unlock_ram_in_cache() are 83xx, 85xx, > > 86xx, and 74xx_7xx. > > > > It looks like the most of them had "issues" in their implementation that > > could explain why there weren't enabled: > > 83xx - ade50c7fa1b16ef98be17e9c3ae286aecf4f5605, > > 6eb2a44e27919fdc601e0c05404b298a7602c0e3 > > > > 86xx - 392438406041415fe64ab8748ec5ab5ad01d1cf7 > > > > 74xx - d685b74c64a38849f1a129b3ab846fbf67dd937e > > > > 85xx - this one works > > > > My best guess was all the non-85xx implementations had bugs or other > > issues that caused U-Boot to become unstable after unlocking the cache. > > Perhaps those bugs are fixed now, but I only have 86xx hardware to test > > on. I've been running a few 86xx boards with the cache unlocked with no > > noticeable problems. > > Thanks for the analysis. So let's go ahead and do this globally.
I'll submit a patch. Hopefully someone with an 83xx and 74xx/7xx board can give it a shot before you apply it. Best, Peter _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
