On Thu, 2010-03-25 at 21:04 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:11:56AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
===Required System State===
[...]
*IRQs disabled
*MMU off
*Instruction cache either on or off
*Data cache turned off
Would recommend saying Data cache(s)
I'm seeing this error with this patch applied, when building for an mpc8641_hpcn
CC drivers/net/gianfar.o
drivers/net/gianfar.c: In function 'gfar_of_init':
drivers/net/gianfar.c:606: error: 'struct platform_device' has no
member named 'node'
drivers/net/gianfar.c:644: error: 'struct
Catalin Marinas wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-25 at 21:04 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:11:56AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
===Required System State===
[...]
*IRQs disabled
*MMU off
*Instruction cache either on or off
*Data cache turned off
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 11:43 AM, Mitch Bradley w...@firmworks.com wrote:
Catalin Marinas wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-25 at 21:04 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:11:56AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
*IRQs disabled
*MMU off
*Instruction cache either on or off
*Data
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 9:17 AM, Timur Tabi ti...@freescale.com wrote:
Grant Likely wrote:
+- fsl,firmware:
+ Usage: Optional.
+ Value type: prop-encoded-array, encoded array of bytes
+ Definition: Contains the QUICC engine firmware blob.
[plus any other properties needed for
On 2010-03-25, at 17:46, Timur Tabi wrote:
The more I think about it, the more I believe that this is how we're going to
have to do it. Whether or not Freescale can embed a non-GPL firmware into a
device tree is still undecided. It may require relicensing all of our device
trees as dual
Grant Likely wrote:
Without the compatible property, the only way I'd know that the child node
contains a firmware is to look at the actual name of the child node, which
(as Scott and I believe) is not better than a compatible property.
If it is always a child of a qe node, then I've got no
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Timur Tabi ti...@freescale.com wrote:
Grant Likely wrote:
Without the compatible property, the only way I'd know that the child node
contains a firmware is to look at the actual name of the child node, which
(as Scott and I believe) is not better than a
Timur Tabi wrote:
Grant Likely wrote:
Without the compatible property, the only way I'd know that the child node
contains a firmware is to look at the actual name of the child node, which (as
Scott and I believe) is not better than a compatible property.
If it is always a child of
Grant Likely wrote:
Nah. That looks totally fine. Not having the firmware under a qe
node would look bad to me.
You don't think it weird to have one QE node reference data from another QE
node, or that the DTS implies that the firmware belongs to one QE more than it
belongs to the other?
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Timur Tabi ti...@freescale.com wrote:
Grant Likely wrote:
Nah. That looks totally fine. Not having the firmware under a qe
node would look bad to me.
You don't think it weird to have one QE node reference data from another QE
node, or that the DTS
Timur Tabi wrote:
Grant Likely wrote:
Nah. That looks totally fine. Not having the firmware under a qe
node would look bad to me.
You don't think it weird to have one QE node reference data from another QE
node, or that the DTS implies that the firmware belongs to one QE more than
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Mitch Bradley w...@firmworks.com wrote:
a) Firmware blob in some random place - requires strong naming of either
firmware blob property or node containing it.
BTW, this exactly the reason for all the bikesheding earlier; but I
don't care at all if it is under a
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Timur Tabi ti...@freescale.com wrote:
Grant Likely wrote:
The node must be a child of a QE node. A QE node can reference the
firmware from another QE node by using the fsl,firmware-phandle
property.
Ok.
I'll post a V3 once everyone else has a chance to
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010, Grant Likely wrote:
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 11:43 AM, Mitch Bradley w...@firmworks.com wrote:
Catalin Marinas wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-25 at 21:04 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:11:56AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
*IRQs disabled
*MMU
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 4:42 PM, Timur Tabi ti...@freescale.com wrote:
Define a binding for embedding a QE firmware blob into the device tree. Also
define a new property for the QE node that links to a firmware node.
Signed-off-by: Timur Tabi ti...@freescale.com
---
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 07:43:20AM -1000, Mitch Bradley wrote:
What is the reason for turning off the data caches? Leaving all caches
turned on and coherent with one another has always worked well for me at
the interface from firmware to a booted program.
With the data caches on, you need
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 4:32 PM, John Williams
john.willi...@petalogix.com wrote:
Grant,
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 3:35 AM, Grant Likely grant.lik...@secretlab.ca
wrote:
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 6:42 AM, Michal Simek mon...@monstr.eu wrote:
Hi Linus,
Please pull Microblaze changes to your
18 matches
Mail list logo
