Mark Jackson <mpfj-l...@mimc.co.uk> wrote: > Haavard Skinnemoen wrote: > > Possibly, but NGW100 is the only one which I've seen reports about. > > STK1000 is safe since it doesn't use the CFI driver. > > I did kinda report this in the thread "JFFS2 scanning bug", and > the "triple-revert" patch you posted on 26/05/09 16:58 appeared > to fix it.
Ah...so it breaks JFFS2 as well? I doubt that changing the environment address fixes that... > Since this didn't change any board files (only the core CFI files) > I guess I assumed this "revert" would work its way upstream and I > wouldn't have to change anything. Hmm, yeah, maybe I should post the revert again. I have to admit I'm completely confused about how u-boot deals with virtual and physical addresses these days. It used to expose only physical addresses through external interfaces, but now it looks like it's a bit of both, and it's impossible to tell which goes where. > Shall I just submit a patch to fix the mimc200 board in the same way > as your NGW100 patch ? Yes, that will probably be a good idea if it has the same problem with saveenv. Haavard _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
