Nishanth Menon wrote:
Ksi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] stated on 8/1/2007 11:39 PM:
What work? It's been 3 months since I've submitted patches for fully
working
U-Boot on TMS320DM6446 platform. I do already have some patches to those
patches. We do run it for something like 6 months on various boards. What
work are you talking about, man?
I'm really really angry, nobody seems to care... What else should I do to
get the _PERFECTLY WORKING_ port into the main tree? What's the problem?
My apologies on not following up mails in the uboot list.. I was not
aware of your work.. but I do know that OMAP24xx and OMAP34xx patches
need a lot of rework.. I could be wrong to imagine that these could
share some files with Davinci and viceversa... I can see the patch here
in the ARM queue: http://www.denx.de/wiki/UBoot/PatchStatus (posted on
2007-05-08) maybe Peter can comment on his plans of merger..
Let us start to get an overview regarding TI DaVinci patches floating
around. Sorry if anything is wrong or missing, please correct then.
First, I think we should split the discussion for OMAP24xx and
OMAP34xx from DaVinci.
So, looking at DaVinci, I can at least identify three patchsets
floating around, not sure if and what the relationship is between them.
1. (Original?) patch from Ksi:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/27603
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/27604
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/27605
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/28314
I think these are the patches mentioned in
http://www.denx.de/wiki/UBoot/PatchStatus
2.Patch from Philip Balister:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/29399
http://www.balister.org/~balister/u-boot-sffsdr.patch
3. Patch from Ivan Tonchev:
http://linux.omap.com/pipermail/davinci-linux-open-source/2007-July/003645.html
http://linux.omap.com/pipermail/davinci-linux-open-source/2007-July/003652.html
I haven't looked at all of these.
A short discussion with Philip Balister showed some basic requirements
for a merge candidate: At least support for TMS320DM6446 based DV-EVM
with default/basic NOR and EMIF configuration. Further, it would be
nice if the initial work is easily extendable to machines beyond the
EVM. May be we need to split the processor stuff off from the board
stuff so that it is easy to add additional boards later.
Opinions?
Best regards
Dirk
P.S.: DaVinci list in CC for information.
_______________________________________________
Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source
