On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Stefano Babic <sba...@denx.de> wrote:
>> Agreed; I will check my current work in progress code and rework it
>> this way. However this prefix change is highly desired as it is
>> callmed m28 (looking as m28evk specific) instead of mx28.
>
> Yes, mx28 is a better name - if a prefix, it should be a SOC prefix, not
> a board name.
>
> But I noted :
> -uint32_t dram_vals[] = {
> +uint32_t mx28_dram_vals[] = {
> 0x00000000, 0x00000000, 0x00000000, 0x00000000,
> 0x00000000, 0x00000000, 0x00000000, 0x00000000,
> 0x00000000, 0x00000000, 0x00000000, 0x00000000,
>
> why is this structure not static ?
Indeed; I will send a new patch for it.
--
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
