On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 02:08:13PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > On 10/09/2012 01:51:14 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > >On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 01:09:22PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > >> On 10/06/2012 11:59:17 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > >> >Hi Anatolij, > >> > > >> >On Sat, 6 Oct 2012 11:31:03 +0200, Anatolij Gustschin > ><ag...@denx.de> > >> >wrote: > >> > > >> >> Fix: > >> >> yaffs_guts.c: In function 'yaffs_check_chunk_erased': > >> >> yaffs_guts.c:324:6: warning: variable 'result' set but not used > >> >> [-Wunused-but-set-variable] > >> [snip] > >> >Tested-by: Albert ARIBAUD <albert.u.b...@aribaud.net> > >> > > >> >This effectively makes VCMA9 and smdk2410 (the two boards which had > >> >the yaffs warnings) build clean. > >> > >> It takes care of the warnings, but I still see this: > >> > >> Configuring for VCMA9 board... > >> make: *** [u-boot] Error 139 > > > >The linaro and ELDK 4.2, 5.2 toolchains build this fine. I would > >suggest grabbing one of those for ARM. > > I'll give one of them a try, but is it expected that the compiler > will be able to do 64/32 division without __udivdi3? Shouldn't > yaffs2 be using lldiv() or do_div()?
Based on a very short skim, yes, yaffs2 looks to be buggy here and for example "end_block = mtd->size / mtd->erasesize - 1;" from yaffs_uboot_glue.c should be using mtd->erase_shift and shifting. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
