Dear Andre Schwarz,
In message <1302786707-15359-5-git-send-email-andre.schw...@matrix-vision.de>
you wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Andre Schwarz <andre.schw...@matrix-vision.de>
There is a ton ot checkpatch warnings and errors. Please ix these.
...
> +int fpga_config_fn(int assert, int flush, int cookie)
> +{
> + volatile immap_t *im = (immap_t *)CONFIG_SYS_IMMR;
> + volatile gpio83xx_t *gpio = (gpio83xx_t *)&im->gpio[0];
> + u32 dvo = gpio->dat;
> +
> + dvo &= ~FPGA_CONFIG;
> + gpio->dat = dvo;
> + udelay(5);
> + dvo |= FPGA_CONFIG;
> + gpio->dat = dvo;
NAK. Please get rid of the "volatile" and use I/O accessors.
Please fix globally.
...
> +#if defined(CONFIG_SYS_DRAM_TEST)
> +int testdram(void)
> +{
> + uint *pstart = (uint *) CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_START;
> + uint *pend = (uint *) CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_END;
> + uint *p;
> +
> + printf("Testing DRAM from 0x%08x to 0x%08x\n",
> + CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_START, CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_END);
> +
> + printf("DRAM test phase 1:\n");
> + for (p = pstart; p < pend; p++)
> + *p = 0xaaaaaaaa;
> +
> + for (p = pstart; p < pend; p++) {
> + if (*p != 0xaaaaaaaa) {
> + printf("DRAM test fails at: %08x\n", (uint) p);
> + return 1;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + printf("DRAM test phase 2:\n");
> + for (p = pstart; p < pend; p++)
> + *p = 0x55555555;
> +
> + for (p = pstart; p < pend; p++) {
> + if (*p != 0x55555555) {
> + printf("DRAM test fails at: %08x\n", (uint) p);
> + return 1;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + printf("DRAM test passed.\n");
> + return 0;
> +}
> +#endif
Do you _really_ have to implement yet another version of a memory test
(and not even a good one). Why cannot you use one of the existing
ones instead?
> +phys_size_t initdram(int board_type)
> +{
> + u32 msize;
> +
> + volatile immap_t *immr = (immap_t *)CONFIG_SYS_IMMR;
> + volatile clk83xx_t *clk = (clk83xx_t *)&immr->clk;
> +
> + /* Enable PCI_CLK[0:1] */
> + clk->occr |= 0xc0000000;
> + udelay(2000);
> +
> +#if defined(CONFIG_SPD_EEPROM)
> + msize = spd_sdram();
> +#else
> + immap_t *im = (immap_t *) CONFIG_SYS_IMMR;
> + u32 msize_log2;
NAK. We don't allow variable declarations in the middle of the code.
> + return msize << 20;
Is there any specific reason for not using get_ram_size() ?
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de
"Everybody is talking about the weather but nobody does anything
about it." - Mark Twain
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
