Hi Simon,
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
These fields are needed for x86.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass s...@chromium.org
---
include/asm-generic/global_data.h | 2 ++
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git
Hi Simon,
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Simon,
Does not look like x86 to me - looks like common code
Yes that tag is wrong. Should I re-issue the patch?
Yes
Hi Simon,
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Simon,
[snip]
IMHO, global data should contain only globally common members and an arch-
specific struct and ditch
Hi Stephen,
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 03/08/2012 11:39 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 4f58f5b8.6070...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
I noticed this patch isn't applied yet that I can find. Are there any
comments on
Hi Marek, Wolfgang,
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Marek Vasut ma...@denx.de wrote:
Dear Wolfgang Denk,
While we are at it:
+ zi = (struct zimage_header *)images-ep;
+
+ if (zi-zi_magic != LINUX_ARM_ZIMAGE_MAGIC) {
This gave me an idea ... this might be how to check for
Hi Wolfgang,
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de wrote:
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message
calbutcldykznszqgxhxcu-uev9nysg77f1xwauvmgb9gc7b...@mail.gmail.com you
wrote:
While we are on the subject - Do either of you think support for the x86
zimage/bzImage format
Hi Marek,
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Marek Vasut ma...@denx.de wrote:
Dear Wolfgang Denk,
Dear Marek Vasut,
In message 201203130113.19092.ma...@denx.de you wrote:
+ zi = (struct zimage_header *)images-ep;
+
+ if (zi-zi_magic != LINUX_ARM_ZIMAGE_MAGIC) {
This gave me an
Hi Wolfgang,
On 03/10/2012 07:31 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Fabio,
In message
caomzo5bgtuysh9mfsbfkzf4dx8o-veiuw46werqgla07_gg...@mail.gmail.com you
wrote:
I was just thinking if this year's Libre Software Meeting (LSM - from
7th to 12th July in Geneva, Switzerland) would be a
Hi Stephen, Wolfgang,
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 03/08/2012 02:29 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stephen,
In message 4f590b25.8090...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
I don't like to see such highly architecture specific stuff in common
code,
Hi Mike,
On 03/06/2012 08:55 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
Building the eNET_SRAM board fails for me:
sc520_timer.c: In function 'sc520_udelay':
sc520_timer.c:81:7: error: variable 'temp' set but not used
[-Werror=unused-but-set-variable]
cc1: all warnings being
Hi Wolfgang,
The following changes since commit fca94c3fd5deef33442813475a5af1650f2d2830:
integrator: remove fragile delay loop from PCI code (2012-03-04 21:15:31
+0100)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.denx.de/u-boot-x86.git master
Mike Frysinger (1):
sc520: fix
Hi Mike,
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 3:20 AM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Tuesday 06 March 2012 01:34:24 Simon Glass wrote:
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 20 February 2012 20:32:47 Simon Glass wrote:
These basic functions are needed by relocation.
Hi Mike,
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
Building the eNET_SRAM board fails for me:
sc520_timer.c: In function 'sc520_udelay':
sc520_timer.c:81:7: error: variable 'temp' set but not used
[-Werror=unused-but-set-variable]
Hi Mike,
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2012 17:31:43 Graeme Russ wrote:
So do I apply this to fix the build warning knowing there is another more
serious bug and knowing this arch is getting scrapped soon, or do I just
leave
Hi Marek,
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Marek Vasut ma...@denx.de wrote:
Dear Mike Frysinger,
On Monday 05 March 2012 18:48:12 Marek Vasut wrote:
He was stupid enough to agree to this.
The commit message does not describe the issue that's being fixed. Please
submit V2 with proper
Hi Mike,
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2012 19:15:54 Marek Vasut wrote:
Acked-by: Marek Vasut ma...@denx.de
Thanks for your patch, it's on it's way to application :)
generally the maintainer who is picking up the patch and
Hi Mike,
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2012 20:46:40 Graeme Russ wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2012 19:15:54 Marek Vasut wrote:
Acked-by: Marek Vasut ma...@denx.de
Thanks
Hi Laurence,
On 03/03/2012 10:47 PM, Laurence Withers wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 10:05:12PM +1100, Graeme Russ wrote:
diff --git a/doc/README.INIT_FUNC b/doc/README.INIT_FUNC
new file mode 100644
index 000..b545390
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/README.INIT_FUNC
@@ -0,0
This is a very rough (i.e. it is not even close to finished and maybe won't
even appply as it sits on top of some other dev patches I have) but it
should give you an idea of what the INIT_FUNC implementation will look like.
Ultimately, tools/mkinitseq.c will process the dependencies and generate
On 03/01/2012 10:39 PM, VISWANADHULA BALAJI wrote:
I am using u-boot-2009.01 for loading yaffs2 image on to the
nand flash.But uboot is not supporting nand write.yaffs.How can i get the
yaffs2 supported patch for u-boot-2009.01.Please help me.
Please post this question on the
Hi Albert,
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Albert ARIBAUD
albert.u.b...@aribaud.net wrote:
Hi Graeme,
Le 29/02/2012 23:41, Graeme Russ a écrit :
Hi Mike,
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Mike Frysingervap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wednesday 29 February 2012 17:22:26 Graeme Russ wrote
Hi Simon, Fabio, Stefano, Marek, Albert
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 8:28 AM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
+Graeme
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 5:23 AM, Fabio Estevam feste...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Currently CONFIG_ARCH_CPU_INIT is used to select arch_cpu_init() function.
arch_cpu_init()
Hi Mike,
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 6:04 AM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Tuesday 28 February 2012 18:32:57 Graeme Russ wrote:
And this is why I dislike the implementation - You have to do all sorts of
weird calucations to put things in the right place when, in fact, the
location
Hi Mike,
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wednesday 29 February 2012 17:22:26 Graeme Russ wrote:
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 6:04 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Tuesday 28 February 2012 18:32:57 Graeme Russ wrote:
And this is why I dislike
Hi Albert,
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Albert ARIBAUD
albert.u.b...@aribaud.net wrote:
Hi Alex,
Le 21/02/2012 00:24, Alex Hornung a écrit :
Hi,
I've run into some memory corruption due to an error in the logic used
to allocate the bd (and gd) during board_init of the nios2.
Hi Albert,
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Albert ARIBAUD
albert.u.b...@aribaud.net wrote:
Hi Graeme,
Le 28/02/2012 23:39, Graeme Russ a écrit :
Hi Albert,
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Albert ARIBAUD
albert.u.b...@aribaud.net wrote:
Hi Alex,
Le 21/02/2012 00:24, Alex Hornung
Hi Albert,
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Albert ARIBAUD
albert.u.b...@aribaud.net wrote:
Le 29/02/2012 00:20, Graeme Russ a écrit :
Hi Albert,
No - GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE should be sizeof(gd_t)
The space reserved between U-Boot and the heap needs to be sizeof(gd_t) +
sizeof(bd-t
Hi Asif,
On 02/27/2012 07:19 PM, Asif Sulikeri wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
mailto:graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Asif,
On 02/27/2012 05:26 PM, Asif Sulikeri wrote:
And the increase of 100kB is massive
Hi Wolfgang,
I notice you've finally gotten sick of 'talking to the wall' regarding
unmaintained code (net, USB, AVR32, etc.)
To make life a little easier for everyone, maybe we can put together a list
of U-Boot sub-components which do not have an active maintainer so we can
discuss what to do
Hi Marek,
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Marek Vasut marek.va...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Wolfgang,
I notice you've finally gotten sick of 'talking to the wall' regarding
unmaintained code (net, USB, AVR32, etc.)
To make life a little easier for everyone, maybe we can put together a list
of
Hi Viswanadhula,
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 3:37 PM, VISWANADHULA BALAJI
vbalaj...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Iam using SMDK6410 arm11 board having the samsung Nandflash with a
capacity of 1Gb.Iam not able to load the yaffs2image on to the Nandflash
from uboot by the command
Hi,
On Feb 27, 2012 4:57 PM, Asif Sulikeri asifiqbal...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi any updates on this?
Have you looked into any of my other suggestions?
Regards,
Graeme
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 6:44 AM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Asif,
On 02/24/2012 04:43 PM, Asif Sulikeri
Hi Asif,
On 02/27/2012 05:26 PM, Asif Sulikeri wrote:
And the increase of 100kB is massive - are you sure you are
compiling with
the same set of options defined in the board config file? If you are
sure,
then it would be interesting to find out what has caused it.
Hi Asif,
On 02/24/2012 04:43 PM, Asif Sulikeri wrote:
Thanks Graeme,
replies in-line,
Appreciated (after all, that is ML etiquette)
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
mailto:graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Asif,
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 4:25
Hi Alex,
On 02/23/2012 07:13 PM, Alex Hornung wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On 21/02/12 10:33, Graeme Russ wrote:
Hi Alex,
On 02/21/2012 10:45 AM, Alex Hornung wrote:
* Adjust the GBL_DATA_OFFSET to account for the fact that we'll be
using the space between that offset and the start
Hi Asif,
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Asif Sulikeri asifiqbal...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, any updates on this, this is a blocker for me, and waiting for your
suggestions to resolve this issue.
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Asif Sulikeri asifiqbal...@gmail.comwrote:
Detlev Zundel dzu at
Ho Marek,
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Marek Vasut marek.va...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday 22 February 2012 17:15:50 Marek Vasut wrote:
looks like get_tbclk() and get_ticks() looks all the same just about
everywhere. What about introducing a weak alias for these functions so in
case
Hi Alex,
On 02/21/2012 10:45 AM, Alex Hornung wrote:
* Adjust the GBL_DATA_OFFSET to account for the fact that we'll be
using the space between that offset and the start of the malloc
region to allocate both a gd structure and a board info structure.
* This fixes a memory corruption
Hi Simon, Albert.
On 02/22/2012 07:07 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Albert,
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Albert ARIBAUD
albert.u.b...@aribaud.net wrote:
Hi Simon,
One general question: am I right in saying that in the current
implementation, relocate_code executes mostly on the final
Hi Simon, Tom
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Tom,
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Tom,
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 2:59 PM, Tom Rini tr...@ti.com
Hi Simon,
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
This series creates a generic board.c implementation which
Hi Wolfgang,
On 02/13/2012 06:31 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
So basically you are suggesting to completely remove shell access in U-Boot
which is one thing that make U-Boot so attractive.
Not remove it, but don't give the user an interactive shell when he is
running in production mode. You
Hi Wolfgang,
On 02/12/2012 07:09 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Graeme,
In message 4f35ebbf.3050...@gmail.com you wrote:
I do a lot of work with Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) and Remote
Telemetry Units (RTUs). One example of what the bootloader is used for is
low-level
Hi Frans,
On 02/11/2012 08:00 PM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
Graeme, if you want to keep people outisde the bootloader in a
reasonably safe way and are developing your own hardware an option is
to put the password in e.g. an eeprom and do a compare in u-boot.
Of course a persistent hacker
Hi Wolfgang,
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 6:17 AM, Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de wrote:
Dear Graeme,
In message 4f378753.4070...@gmail.com you wrote:
Do not do this in the boot loader. It is not the environment for such
things. When it comes to security, you are automatically pulling in
Hi Wolfgang,
On 02/10/2012 10:38 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message
CALButCLT2o=7qo4gbm0m5tp3byxpcpqr7sx6wyh09jkcudm...@mail.gmail.com you
wrote:
As an adjunct to a recent discussion, I wonder if there would be much
point in password protecting access to the U-Boot
Hi Mike,
On 02/11/2012 07:37 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
waving your hands around and saying doing XXX is more secure and therefore
we
should do it is theater. i'm not against passwords or ASLR or anything else
Agreed - I've already said as much in the ASLR thread
in u-boot, but like
Hi Guys,
My 2c worth...
The thought of applying ASLR to improve security is pointless unless you
have identified a reason to do so. You can't just apply a security
hardening technique willy-nilly and expect you security to improve. The
security of a system is equal to the weakest link and no
Hi Jason,
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Jason Markley (ggsg)
jamar...@ggsg.cisco.com wrote:
On 2/9/12 5:16 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
Hi Guys,
My 2c worth...
The thought of applying ASLR to improve security is pointless unless you
have identified a reason to do so. You can't just apply
Hi All,
As an adjunct to a recent discussion, I wonder if there would be much
point in password protecting access to the U-Boot command line. The
password could be saved in an environment variable as an MD-5 or SHA-256
hash.
But I wonder if:
a) It's worth it, and;
b) If it would be secure
Hi Simon,
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Dirk,
But turning on the cache should be trivial - it is already supported
so you just need to implement the enable_dcache() function(?) I think.
Also make sure that the I-Cache is on as early as possible.
Hi Simon,
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
Also make sure that the I-Cache is on as early as possible. Relocation
is done with the d-cache off so is slow. Takes about 40ms for me from
Have a close look at the latest x86 patches (not yet pulled into
Hi Wolfgang,
The following changes since commit 137703b811502dfea364650fb3e17f20b4c21333:
overo: add SPL support (2012-01-16 08:40:13 +0100)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.denx.de/u-boot-x86.git master
Graeme Russ (18):
x86: Import glibc memcpy implementation
Hi Simon,
On 02/06/2012 10:41 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Simon
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Graeme,
[snip]
Which reminds me - did you do that pull request
Hi Wolfgang,
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de wrote:
Dear Dirk Behme,
In message 4f30c794.50...@de.bosch.com you wrote:
Also, if SPL can determine total SDRAM, copy U-Boot to the final location
and perform the relocations, there is no need for relocation to be
Hi Wolfgang,
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de wrote:
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message
CALButCKfG+guStJP+M5E=nsr34vphzgbrebxquxd6028sw6...@mail.gmail.com you
wrote:
If SPL was to determing the relocation address, it would also have to
read the environment
Hi Tony,
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Troy Kisky
troy.ki...@boundarydevices.com wrote:
On 2/7/2012 5:39 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
Hi Troy,
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Troy Kisky
troy.ki...@boundarydevices.com wrote:
This makes adding linker defined tables easier
as only 1 lds file
Hi Troy,
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Tony,
Oops, sorry - forgot to proof read
Regards,
Graeme
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Hi Troy,
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Add U_BOOT_LDS_SECTION(phy_entry, 4) to all the linker scripts
Oh, and it should have an #ifdef around it - I know it's probably harmless,
but I dislike having 'fluff' floating around :)
Regards,
Graeme
Hi Troy,
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Troy Kisky
troy.ki...@boundarydevices.com wrote:
On 2/7/2012 6:21 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
Hi Tony,
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Troy Kisky
troy.ki...@boundarydevices.com wrote:
That works fine for existing sections.. i.e
U_BOOT_LDS_SECTION
Hi Troy,
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Troy Kisky
troy.ki...@boundarydevices.com wrote:
On 2/7/2012 7:24 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
The next biggie is where to define all the externs exported from the
linker script as a result of using the U_BOOT_LDS_SECTION macro. I'm half
tempted to think
Hi Prafulla,
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 7:49 PM, Prafulla Wadaskar prafu...@marvell.com wrote:
after http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/136415/ was applied. All Marvell
build fails with below error
common/libcommon.o: In function `cread_line':
/home/uboot/src/u-boot-arm/common/main.c:717:
Hi Wolfgang,
On 02/06/2012 06:51 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message
CALButC+==qgs5eaahtqqu4zejqvg-3187ewaqu-fv3dwp5q...@mail.gmail.com you
wrote:
I think the immediate focus should be on centralising the init sequence
processing into /common/init.c and then bringing
Hi Mike,
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 6:27 AM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Monday 06 February 2012 09:49:27 Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Graeme Russ wrote:
On 02/06/2012 06:51 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Graeme Russ wrote:
I think the immediate focus should
Hi Wolfgang,
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de wrote:
Dear Albert ARIBAUD,
In message 4f304463.1050...@aribaud.net you wrote:
In my experience, the offset is consistent on a given platform so once
you do the dance once to figure out where it'll be placed you can
Hi Mike,
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Saturday 04 February 2012 22:02:45 Troy Kisky wrote:
since we preprocess our linker scripts now, i'd suggest using #include rather
than INCLUDE
+1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/u-boot-common.lds
+ . =
Hi Wolfgang, Simon,
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de wrote:
Dear Simon Glass,
In message
capnjgz2z0ojdlhz6yd5uuwru7pmjbleoghzhk7rwgwk46xx...@mail.gmail.com you
wrote:
This patch shows how to do this sort of thing on ARM. I would like to
see this feature in
Hi Simon
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Wolfgang, Simon,
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de wrote:
Dear Simon Glass,
In message
Hi Simon,
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Simon
[snip]
Sorry for the dealy, but hopefully I'll have it all sorted by the end of
the week
OK thanks for the update
Hi Mike,
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sunday 05 February 2012 17:07:41 Graeme Russ wrote:
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Saturday 04 February 2012 22:02:45 Troy Kisky wrote:
--- /dev/null
+++ b/u-boot-common.lds
Hi Mike,
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sunday 05 February 2012 22:43:33 Graeme Russ wrote:
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
it isn't just that. i don't think a single u-boot.lds for every arch is
feasible. the kernel method
Hi Marek,
On 01/26/2012 04:59 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
This patch series add support for new board Nokia RX-51 (aka N900).
Last two patches adding on screen bootmenu support.
Isn't on-screen bootmenu already supported by common/menu.c stuff ?
This series supersedes the last sent version.
Wolfgang,
On 01/25/2012 01:27 AM, Pali Rohár wrote:
This patch series add support for new board Nokia RX-51 (aka N900).
Last two patches adding on screen bootmenu support.
This series supersedes the last sent version.
Just to let you know, I went through this submission off-list with Pali
Hi Simon,
On 08/01/12 09:15, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
---
Changes for v2:
- None
arch/x86/lib/Makefile |1 +
arch/x86/lib/board.c| 69
On 08/01/12 09:21, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Create an init function array for board_init_f_r - This finalises the
migration to a purely array based initialisation mechanism
Also tweak a few comments while we
Hi Simon,
On 08/01/12 09:33, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Andreas,
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 11:47 PM, Andreas Bießmann
andreas.de...@googlemail.com wrote:
Dear Simon,
On 28.12.11 07:35, Simon Glass wrote:
We want to unify the global_data structure. Most fields are common across
architectures,
Hi Simon,
On 08/01/12 09:39, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Gururaja,
On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Hebbar, Gururaja
gururaja.heb...@ti.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 06, 2012 at 12:05:40, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Hebbar, Gururaja,
[snip]
_after_ the list has been created - If this breaks
Hi Wolfgang,
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de wrote:
Dear Graeme,
In message 4f02da64.60...@gmail.com you wrote:
[snip]
INIT_FUNC(cpu_init_f, f, fred, blah, foo);
Generates the string:
f:cpu_init_f:fred:blah:foo
and we can parse each of the elf archives to
Hi Simon,
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Graham,
On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Wolfgang,
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de wrote:
Dear Graeme,
In message 4f02da64.60
Hi Simon,
On 04/01/12 16:21, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
The implementations of memcpy and memset are now the optimised versions
from glibc, so use them instead of simple copy loops
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ
On 04/01/12 16:23, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
---
arch/x86/cpu/start.S |3 ++-
arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h |6 +-
2 files changed, 7
On 04/01/12 16:24, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
This probably needs a commit message?
Done
Regards,
Graeme
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http
Hi Simon,
On 04/01/12 16:28, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
Commit message?
Added in v2
---
arch/x86/cpu/start.S | 20 +---
arch
Hi Simon,
On 04/01/12 16:36, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Use the base address of the 'F' segment as a pointer to the global data
structure. By adding the linear address (i.e. the 'D' segment address)
as the first
Hi Simon,
On 04/01/12 16:38, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
---
arch/x86/cpu/cpu.c| 18 +++---
arch/x86/include/asm/u-boot-x86.h |1
Hi Simon,
On 04/01/12 16:40, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
---
arch/x86/lib/board.c | 15 ++-
1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff
Hi Simon,
On 04/01/12 16:42, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
Seems a bit more than just checkpatch.
True - I'll change the name to 'Tweak IDT and GDT for alignment
Hi Simon,
On 04/01/12 16:48, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
Perhaps mention why? Anyway:
Added commit message 'This function simply does not belong in board.c
Hi Simon,
On 04/01/12 16:51, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
---
arch/x86/include/asm/init_helpers.h | 39 +
arch/x86/include/asm/init_wrappers.h | 42
Hi Simon,
On 04/01/12 16:52, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Graeme,
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
---
arch/x86/include/asm/init_helpers.h |5 +
arch/x86/include/asm/relocate.h | 33 ++
arch
Taken from glibc version 2.14.90
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
---
Changes for v2:
- None
arch/x86/include/asm/string.h |2 +-
arch/x86/lib/string.c | 61 +
2 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git
The implementations of memcpy and memset are now the optimised versions
from glibc, so use them instead of simple copy loops
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
---
Changes for v2:
- Removed unneeded brackets
arch/x86/lib/board.c | 17 +
1 files changed, 5
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
---
Changes for v2:
- Use an enum
- Add defined for GDT size (previously added in patch 7)
- Use X86_ namespace (as per Linux headers)
arch/x86/cpu/cpu.c |8
arch/x86/cpu/start.S |3 ++-
arch/x86
The inline assembler is ugly and uses hard coded magic numbers. Make it more
elegant to allow cleaner implementation of future GDT related patches. The
compiler seems smart enough to generate the same code anyway
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
---
Changes for v2:
- Rebased
Move the relocation offset calculation out of assembler and into C. This
also paves the way for the upcoming init sequence simplification by adding
the board_init_f_r flash to RAM transitional function
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
---
Changes for v2:
- Added commit message
) is
still fairly cheap
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
---
Changes for v2:
- Rebased against changes made to patch #3
- Removed extra indent
- Tweaked commit message
arch/x86/cpu/cpu.c | 53 --
arch/x86/cpu/start.S
This commit introduces no functional changes - It simply re-arranges the
calculations so that adding to them in future commits will be cleaner
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
---
Changes for v2:
- Fixed typo in title
- Added commit message
arch/x86/lib/board.c | 23
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
---
Changes for v2:
- None
arch/x86/lib/board.c |4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/board.c b/arch/x86/lib/board.c
index b64c2d3..3d82165 100644
--- a/arch/x86/lib/board.c
+++ b/arch/x86/lib
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
---
Changes for v2:
- None
arch/x86/lib/board.c | 15 ++-
1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/board.c b/arch/x86/lib/board.c
index 56acf35..a240d26 100644
--- a/arch/x86/lib/board.c
+++ b
Signed-off-by: Graeme Russ graeme.r...@gmail.com
---
Changes for v2:
- Tweaked commit title
arch/x86/cpu/cpu.c| 18 +++---
arch/x86/include/asm/u-boot-x86.h |1 +
arch/x86/lib/board.c |1 +
3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 3 deletions
301 - 400 of 1517 matches
Mail list logo
