Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5 0/8] Extend LPC32xx functionality and add LPC32xx-based work_92015 board
Hi Simon, Le Thu, 23 Apr 2015 09:16:32 -0600, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org a écrit : Hi Albert, On 8 April 2015 at 00:12, Albert ARIBAUD albert.arib...@3adev.fr wrote: Hi Simon, Le Tue, 7 Apr 2015 21:20:22 -0600, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org a écrit : Well the problem is that we don't have driver model support in rtc, We do have an eeprom uclass, but it is currently implemented only for sandbox. We don't have a hwmon uclass (although there is thermal, and I wonder if that is similar? No idea. :/ I'd be willing to create an rtc uclass and convert over ds1374 if you are happy to test it? I can test ds1374 right now, but that is not a hardware that I can keep. I should be able to test eeprom on some other HW which I own. I posted an RTC conversion series. Are you still able to test ds1374? I should, but I only have a slight chance to do so today; otherwise, not before sunday afternoon. Regards, Simon Cordialement, Albert ARIBAUD 3ADEV ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5 0/8] Extend LPC32xx functionality and add LPC32xx-based work_92015 board
Hi Albert, On 8 April 2015 at 00:12, Albert ARIBAUD albert.arib...@3adev.fr wrote: Hi Simon, Le Tue, 7 Apr 2015 21:20:22 -0600, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org a écrit : Well the problem is that we don't have driver model support in rtc, We do have an eeprom uclass, but it is currently implemented only for sandbox. We don't have a hwmon uclass (although there is thermal, and I wonder if that is similar? No idea. :/ I'd be willing to create an rtc uclass and convert over ds1374 if you are happy to test it? I can test ds1374 right now, but that is not a hardware that I can keep. I should be able to test eeprom on some other HW which I own. I posted an RTC conversion series. Are you still able to test ds1374? Regards, Simon ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5 0/8] Extend LPC32xx functionality and add LPC32xx-based work_92015 board
Hi Simon, Le Tue, 7 Apr 2015 21:20:22 -0600, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org a écrit : Well the problem is that we don't have driver model support in rtc, We do have an eeprom uclass, but it is currently implemented only for sandbox. We don't have a hwmon uclass (although there is thermal, and I wonder if that is similar? No idea. :/ I'd be willing to create an rtc uclass and convert over ds1374 if you are happy to test it? I can test ds1374 right now, but that is not a hardware that I can keep. I should be able to test eeprom on some other HW which I own. Regards, Simon Cordialement, Albert ARIBAUD 3ADEV ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5 0/8] Extend LPC32xx functionality and add LPC32xx-based work_92015 board
Hi Albert, On 24 March 2015 at 02:09, Albert ARIBAUD albert.arib...@3adev.fr wrote: Bonjour Simon, Le Mon, 23 Mar 2015 17:55:56 -0600, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org a écrit : Hi Albert, On 16 March 2015 at 14:28, Albert ARIBAUD albert.u.b...@aribaud.net wrote: Hello Simon, On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:40:54 -0600, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote: Hi Anish, On 16 March 2015 at 10:28, Anish Khurana anish.khurana130...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Simon, can you please share the git branch so that I can also review it. I am writing for LPC2148 board. This is Albert's work. Once he shares if I am sure it will be public. Since this is a derivative of the patch series I've posted here, I could hardly see a problem in making it public anyway. I've pushed the broken series, the one with I2C DM and COMPAT, as branch dm-i2c of repo u-boot-arm. Anyone feel free to fiddle with it. This does not build for me - e.g. lpc32xx_i2c_set_bus_speed() uses a struct i2c_adaptor * when it should use struct udevice *. Do I have the right version? Yes you have, but it most probably misses attempts I did at fixing the LPC32XX driver, sorry. Since the problem is not with this driver /per se/, try with removing the lpc32xx driver from the build altogether; you should end up with only these errors: /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/rtc/ds1374.c: In function ‘rtc_read’: /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/rtc/ds1374.c:217:2: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘i2c_reg_read’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] return (i2c_reg_read (CONFIG_SYS_I2C_RTC_ADDR, reg)); ^ /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/rtc/ds1374.c: In function ‘rtc_write’: /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/rtc/ds1374.c:224:3: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘i2c_reg_write’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] i2c_reg_write (CONFIG_SYS_I2C_RTC_ADDR, reg, val); ^ make[1]: *** [drivers/i2c] Error 2 make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_date.c: In function ‘do_date’: /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_date.c:42:14: error: ‘CONFIG_SYS_RTC_BUS_NUM’ undeclared (first use in this function) I2C_SET_BUS(CONFIG_SYS_RTC_BUS_NUM); ^ /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_date.c:42:14: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in make[2]: *** [common/cmd_date.o] Error 1 make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_eeprom.c: In function ‘eeprom_read’: /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_eeprom.c:155:16: error: ‘I2C_RXTX_LEN’ undeclared (first use in this function) if (maxlen I2C_RXTX_LEN) ^ /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_eeprom.c:155:16: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_eeprom.c: In function ‘eeprom_write’: /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_eeprom.c:253:16: error: ‘I2C_RXTX_LEN’ undeclared (first use in this function) if (maxlen I2C_RXTX_LEN) ^ /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_dtt.c: In function ‘dtt_init’: /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_dtt.c:41:14: error: ‘CONFIG_SYS_DTT_BUS_NUM’ undeclared (first use in this function) I2C_SET_BUS(CONFIG_SYS_DTT_BUS_NUM); ^ /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_dtt.c:41:14: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_dtt.c: In function ‘dtt_i2c’: /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_dtt.c:65:14: error: ‘CONFIG_SYS_DTT_BUS_NUM’ undeclared (first use in this function) I2C_SET_BUS(CONFIG_SYS_DTT_BUS_NUM); ^ make[2]: *** [common/cmd_eeprom.o] Error 1 make[2]: *** [common/cmd_dtt.o] Error 1 make[1]: *** [common] Error 2 make[1]: *** wait: No child processes. Stop. Of course the link stage will probably fail, but I guess once the compiler stage works for ds1374, date, eeprom and dtt, the linking should work. Well the problem is that we don't have driver model support in rtc, We do have an eeprom uclass, but it is currently implemented only for sandbox. We don't have a hwmon uclass (although there is thermal, and I wonder if that is similar? I'd be willing to create an rtc uclass and convert over ds1374 if you are happy to test it? Regards, Simon ___ U-Boot mailing list
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5 0/8] Extend LPC32xx functionality and add LPC32xx-based work_92015 board
Bonjour Simon, Le Mon, 23 Mar 2015 17:55:56 -0600, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org a écrit : Hi Albert, On 16 March 2015 at 14:28, Albert ARIBAUD albert.u.b...@aribaud.net wrote: Hello Simon, On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:40:54 -0600, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote: Hi Anish, On 16 March 2015 at 10:28, Anish Khurana anish.khurana130...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Simon, can you please share the git branch so that I can also review it. I am writing for LPC2148 board. This is Albert's work. Once he shares if I am sure it will be public. Since this is a derivative of the patch series I've posted here, I could hardly see a problem in making it public anyway. I've pushed the broken series, the one with I2C DM and COMPAT, as branch dm-i2c of repo u-boot-arm. Anyone feel free to fiddle with it. This does not build for me - e.g. lpc32xx_i2c_set_bus_speed() uses a struct i2c_adaptor * when it should use struct udevice *. Do I have the right version? Yes you have, but it most probably misses attempts I did at fixing the LPC32XX driver, sorry. Since the problem is not with this driver /per se/, try with removing the lpc32xx driver from the build altogether; you should end up with only these errors: /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/rtc/ds1374.c: In function ‘rtc_read’: /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/rtc/ds1374.c:217:2: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘i2c_reg_read’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] return (i2c_reg_read (CONFIG_SYS_I2C_RTC_ADDR, reg)); ^ /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/rtc/ds1374.c: In function ‘rtc_write’: /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/rtc/ds1374.c:224:3: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘i2c_reg_write’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] i2c_reg_write (CONFIG_SYS_I2C_RTC_ADDR, reg, val); ^ make[1]: *** [drivers/i2c] Error 2 make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_date.c: In function ‘do_date’: /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_date.c:42:14: error: ‘CONFIG_SYS_RTC_BUS_NUM’ undeclared (first use in this function) I2C_SET_BUS(CONFIG_SYS_RTC_BUS_NUM); ^ /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_date.c:42:14: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in make[2]: *** [common/cmd_date.o] Error 1 make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_eeprom.c: In function ‘eeprom_read’: /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_eeprom.c:155:16: error: ‘I2C_RXTX_LEN’ undeclared (first use in this function) if (maxlen I2C_RXTX_LEN) ^ /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_eeprom.c:155:16: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_eeprom.c: In function ‘eeprom_write’: /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_eeprom.c:253:16: error: ‘I2C_RXTX_LEN’ undeclared (first use in this function) if (maxlen I2C_RXTX_LEN) ^ /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_dtt.c: In function ‘dtt_init’: /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_dtt.c:41:14: error: ‘CONFIG_SYS_DTT_BUS_NUM’ undeclared (first use in this function) I2C_SET_BUS(CONFIG_SYS_DTT_BUS_NUM); ^ /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_dtt.c:41:14: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_dtt.c: In function ‘dtt_i2c’: /usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/common/cmd_dtt.c:65:14: error: ‘CONFIG_SYS_DTT_BUS_NUM’ undeclared (first use in this function) I2C_SET_BUS(CONFIG_SYS_DTT_BUS_NUM); ^ make[2]: *** [common/cmd_eeprom.o] Error 1 make[2]: *** [common/cmd_dtt.o] Error 1 make[1]: *** [common] Error 2 make[1]: *** wait: No child processes. Stop. Of course the link stage will probably fail, but I guess once the compiler stage works for ds1374, date, eeprom and dtt, the linking should work. Regards, Simon Cordialement, Albert ARIBAUD 3ADEV ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5 0/8] Extend LPC32xx functionality and add LPC32xx-based work_92015 board
Hi Albert,
On 16 March 2015 at 14:28, Albert ARIBAUD albert.u.b...@aribaud.net wrote:
Hello Simon,
On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:40:54 -0600, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org
wrote:
Hi Anish,
On 16 March 2015 at 10:28, Anish Khurana anish.khurana130...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Simon,
can you please share the git branch so that I can also review it. I am
writing for LPC2148 board.
This is Albert's work. Once he shares if I am sure it will be public.
Since this is a derivative of the patch series I've posted here, I
could hardly see a problem in making it public anyway.
I've pushed the broken series, the one with I2C DM and COMPAT, as
branch dm-i2c of repo u-boot-arm. Anyone feel free to fiddle with
it.
This does not build for me - e.g. lpc32xx_i2c_set_bus_speed() uses a
struct i2c_adaptor * when it should use struct udevice *.
Do I have the right version?
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:64:4:
warning: ‘struct i2c_adapter’ declared inside parameter list [enabled
by default]
unsigned int speed)
^
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:64:4:
warning: its scope is only this definition or declaration, which is
probably not what you want [enabled by default]
In file included from
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:13:0:
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:
In function ‘lpc32xx_i2c_set_bus_speed’:
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:76:39:
error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
writel(half_period, lpc32xx_i2c[adap-hwadapnr]-clk_hi);
^
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/arch/arm/include/asm/io.h:77:55:
note: in definition of macro ‘__arch_putl’
#define __arch_putl(v,a) (*(volatile unsigned int *)(a) = (v))
^
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:76:2:
note: in expansion of macro ‘writel’
writel(half_period, lpc32xx_i2c[adap-hwadapnr]-clk_hi);
^
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:77:39:
error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
writel(half_period, lpc32xx_i2c[adap-hwadapnr]-clk_lo);
^
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/arch/arm/include/asm/io.h:146:48:
note: in expansion of macro ‘__arch_putl’
#define writel(v,c) ({ u32 __v = v; __iowmb(); __arch_putl(__v,c); __v; })
^
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:77:2:
note: in expansion of macro ‘writel’
writel(half_period, lpc32xx_i2c[adap-hwadapnr]-clk_lo);
^
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:
At top level:
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:82:37:
warning: ‘struct i2c_adapter’ declared inside parameter list [enabled
by default]
static int lpc32xx_i2c_probe(struct i2c_adapter *adap, u8 dev)
^
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:
In function ‘lpc32xx_i2c_probe’:
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:84:54:
error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
struct lpc32xx_i2c_registers *i2c = lpc32xx_i2c[adap-hwadapnr];
^
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:
In function ‘lpc32xx_i2c_read_data’:
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:133:7:
error: ‘data’ undeclared (first use in this function)
*(data++) = readl(regs-rx);
^
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:133:7:
note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each
function it appears in
In file included from
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:13:0:
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:
In function ‘lpc32xx_i2c_xfer’:
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:194:34:
error: ‘i2c’ undeclared (first use in this function)
writel(LPC32XX_I2C_SOFT_RESET, i2c-ctrl);
^
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/arch/arm/include/asm/io.h:77:55:
note: in definition of macro ‘__arch_putl’
#define __arch_putl(v,a) (*(volatile unsigned int *)(a) = (v))
^
/usr/local/google/c/cosarm/src/third_party/u-boot/files/drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c:194:2:
note: in expansion of macro ‘writel’
writel(LPC32XX_I2C_SOFT_RESET, i2c-ctrl);
^
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5 0/8] Extend LPC32xx functionality and add LPC32xx-based work_92015 board
Hello Simon, On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:40:54 -0600, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote: Hi Anish, On 16 March 2015 at 10:28, Anish Khurana anish.khurana130...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Simon, can you please share the git branch so that I can also review it. I am writing for LPC2148 board. This is Albert's work. Once he shares if I am sure it will be public. Since this is a derivative of the patch series I've posted here, I could hardly see a problem in making it public anyway. I've pushed the broken series, the one with I2C DM and COMPAT, as branch dm-i2c of repo u-boot-arm. Anyone feel free to fiddle with it. Regards, Simon Amicalement, -- Albert. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5 0/8] Extend LPC32xx functionality and add LPC32xx-based work_92015 board
Hi Albert, On 14 March 2015 at 07:49, Albert ARIBAUD albert.arib...@3adev.fr wrote: Hi Simon, Le Fri, 13 Mar 2015 18:33:51 -0600, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org a écrit : Hi Albert, On 13 March 2015 at 02:04, Albert ARIBAUD (3ADEV) albert.arib...@3adev.fr wrote: This series extends functionality for the LPC32xx platform and introduces the WORK Microwave work_92105 board which makes use of the extended functionality. NOTES: A - I2C driver remains non-DM During v2 review, it was suggested to move to DM for I2C. However, this caused issues with the 'date', 'dtt' and 'eeprom' commands which are configured in this board. Therefore the I2C move to DM was not done. Does CONFIG_DM_I2C_COMPAT help with this? If you define that you get the old API. Nope, I tried CONFIG_I2C_COMPAT as soon as I hit the errors, and itdid not fix things. That's unfortunate. Perhaps there are some things missing. Otherwise if you can share the (broken) patches I can take a look at how to fix those commands. I'll push a branch on Monday for this. Thanks, I'll take a look when I get it. Regards, Simon ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5 0/8] Extend LPC32xx functionality and add LPC32xx-based work_92015 board
Hi Simon, can you please share the git branch so that I can also review it. I am writing for LPC2148 board. Thanks, Anish On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 9:16 PM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote: Hi Albert, On 14 March 2015 at 07:49, Albert ARIBAUD albert.arib...@3adev.fr wrote: Hi Simon, Le Fri, 13 Mar 2015 18:33:51 -0600, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org a écrit : Hi Albert, On 13 March 2015 at 02:04, Albert ARIBAUD (3ADEV) albert.arib...@3adev.fr wrote: This series extends functionality for the LPC32xx platform and introduces the WORK Microwave work_92105 board which makes use of the extended functionality. NOTES: A - I2C driver remains non-DM During v2 review, it was suggested to move to DM for I2C. However, this caused issues with the 'date', 'dtt' and 'eeprom' commands which are configured in this board. Therefore the I2C move to DM was not done. Does CONFIG_DM_I2C_COMPAT help with this? If you define that you get the old API. Nope, I tried CONFIG_I2C_COMPAT as soon as I hit the errors, and itdid not fix things. That's unfortunate. Perhaps there are some things missing. Otherwise if you can share the (broken) patches I can take a look at how to fix those commands. I'll push a branch on Monday for this. Thanks, I'll take a look when I get it. Regards, Simon ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5 0/8] Extend LPC32xx functionality and add LPC32xx-based work_92015 board
Hi Anish, On 16 March 2015 at 10:28, Anish Khurana anish.khurana130...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Simon, can you please share the git branch so that I can also review it. I am writing for LPC2148 board. This is Albert's work. Once he shares if I am sure it will be public. Regards, Simon Thanks, Anish On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 9:16 PM, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org wrote: Hi Albert, On 14 March 2015 at 07:49, Albert ARIBAUD albert.arib...@3adev.fr wrote: Hi Simon, Le Fri, 13 Mar 2015 18:33:51 -0600, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org a écrit : Hi Albert, On 13 March 2015 at 02:04, Albert ARIBAUD (3ADEV) albert.arib...@3adev.fr wrote: This series extends functionality for the LPC32xx platform and introduces the WORK Microwave work_92105 board which makes use of the extended functionality. NOTES: A - I2C driver remains non-DM During v2 review, it was suggested to move to DM for I2C. However, this caused issues with the 'date', 'dtt' and 'eeprom' commands which are configured in this board. Therefore the I2C move to DM was not done. Does CONFIG_DM_I2C_COMPAT help with this? If you define that you get the old API. Nope, I tried CONFIG_I2C_COMPAT as soon as I hit the errors, and itdid not fix things. That's unfortunate. Perhaps there are some things missing. Otherwise if you can share the (broken) patches I can take a look at how to fix those commands. I'll push a branch on Monday for this. Thanks, I'll take a look when I get it. Regards, Simon ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5 0/8] Extend LPC32xx functionality and add LPC32xx-based work_92015 board
Hi Simon, Le Fri, 13 Mar 2015 18:33:51 -0600, Simon Glass s...@chromium.org a écrit : Hi Albert, On 13 March 2015 at 02:04, Albert ARIBAUD (3ADEV) albert.arib...@3adev.fr wrote: This series extends functionality for the LPC32xx platform and introduces the WORK Microwave work_92105 board which makes use of the extended functionality. NOTES: A - I2C driver remains non-DM During v2 review, it was suggested to move to DM for I2C. However, this caused issues with the 'date', 'dtt' and 'eeprom' commands which are configured in this board. Therefore the I2C move to DM was not done. Does CONFIG_DM_I2C_COMPAT help with this? If you define that you get the old API. Nope, I tried CONFIG_I2C_COMPAT as soon as I hit the errors, and itdid not fix things. Otherwise if you can share the (broken) patches I can take a look at how to fix those commands. I'll push a branch on Monday for this. Regards, Simon Cordialement, Albert ARIBAUD 3ADEV ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5 0/8] Extend LPC32xx functionality and add LPC32xx-based work_92015 board
Hi Albert, On 13 March 2015 at 02:04, Albert ARIBAUD (3ADEV) albert.arib...@3adev.fr wrote: This series extends functionality for the LPC32xx platform and introduces the WORK Microwave work_92105 board which makes use of the extended functionality. NOTES: A - I2C driver remains non-DM During v2 review, it was suggested to move to DM for I2C. However, this caused issues with the 'date', 'dtt' and 'eeprom' commands which are configured in this board. Therefore the I2C move to DM was not done. Does CONFIG_DM_I2C_COMPAT help with this? If you define that you get the old API. Otherwise if you can share the (broken) patches I can take a look at how to fix those commands. Regards, Simon ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
[U-Boot] [PATCH v5 0/8] Extend LPC32xx functionality and add LPC32xx-based work_92015 board
This series extends functionality for the LPC32xx platform and introduces the WORK Microwave work_92105 board which makes use of the extended functionality. NOTES: A - I2C driver remains non-DM During v2 review, it was suggested to move to DM for I2C. However, this caused issues with the 'date', 'dtt' and 'eeprom' commands which are configured in this board. Therefore the I2C move to DM was not done. B - Some checkpatch diagnostics are not fixed The following warnings checkpatch warnings and checks were not fixed: 1. warning: arch/arm/Kconfig,135: please write a paragraph that describes the config symbol fully Other symbols in the same file have no description either. For consistency, I did not add the requested description. 1. check: include/configs/work_92105.h,187: spaces required around that ':' (ctx:VxV) (5 occurrences on the same line) This is due to the value of CONFIG_ETHADDR not being in quotes. As it never is in any other definition of CONFIG_ETHADDR, I left it unchanged. Changes in v5: - switch to CONFIG_SYS_NAND_SELF_INIT - switched board NAND config to CONFIG_SYS_NAND_SELF_INIT Changes in v4: - remove two debugging statements - add __iomem to regs struct - remove useless 'else return;' - take BB marker out of free OOB area - replace magic numbers in OOB reads/writes - add timeouts in NAND loops - use DIV_ROUND_UP where applicable - fix erroneous comment - skip bad blocks in SPL chainload loop Changes in v3: - move DM dependency constraint into Kconfig - move regs pointer and function cache into private struct - discourage readers from using functions implementation as an example - move regs and functions in private struct - remove script/Makefile.spl change - use writel() in DRAM initialization code - remove useless conditionals in dram.c - fix and complete the board README - remove redundant CONFIG_CMD_DM from config header file - add a note re the hard-coded MAC address - add 'single flashable file' make target Changes in v2: - move from legacy to Driver Model support - added MUX setting for SSP0 - cosmetic: added a blank line before copyright - move boot image generation to mkimage framework Albert ARIBAUD (3ADEV) (8): lpc32xx: add Ethernet support lpc32xx: mtd: nand: add MLC NAND controller lpc32xx: i2c: add LPC32xx I2C interface support lpc32xx: add GPIO support lpc32xx: add LPC32xx SSP support (SPI mode) dtt: add ds620 support lpc32xx: add lpc32xx-spl.bin boot image target lpc32xx: add support for board work_92105 Makefile | 20 + arch/arm/Kconfig | 6 + arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/lpc32xx/Makefile| 2 + arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/lpc32xx/clk.c | 34 ++ arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/lpc32xx/cpu.c | 13 + arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/lpc32xx/devices.c | 43 ++ arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/lpc32xx/dram.c | 79 +++ arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/lpc32xx/lowlevel_init.S | 45 ++ arch/arm/include/asm/arch-lpc32xx/clk.h| 16 + arch/arm/include/asm/arch-lpc32xx/config.h | 3 + arch/arm/include/asm/arch-lpc32xx/cpu.h| 3 + arch/arm/include/asm/arch-lpc32xx/gpio.h | 43 ++ arch/arm/include/asm/arch-lpc32xx/mux.h| 18 + arch/arm/include/asm/arch-lpc32xx/sys_proto.h | 8 +- board/work-microwave/work_92105/Kconfig| 15 + board/work-microwave/work_92105/MAINTAINERS| 6 + board/work-microwave/work_92105/Makefile | 10 + board/work-microwave/work_92105/README | 91 +++ board/work-microwave/work_92105/work_92105.c | 62 ++ .../work-microwave/work_92105/work_92105_display.c | 349 +++ .../work-microwave/work_92105/work_92105_display.h | 14 + board/work-microwave/work_92105/work_92105_spl.c | 33 + common/image.c | 1 + configs/work_92105_defconfig | 5 + drivers/gpio/Kconfig | 7 + drivers/gpio/Makefile | 1 + drivers/gpio/lpc32xx_gpio.c| 293 + drivers/hwmon/Makefile | 1 + drivers/hwmon/ds620.c | 65 ++ drivers/i2c/Makefile | 1 + drivers/i2c/lpc32xx_i2c.c | 249 drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile | 1 + drivers/mtd/nand/lpc32xx_nand_mlc.c| 674 + drivers/net/Makefile | 1 + drivers/net/lpc32xx_eth.c | 636 +++ drivers/spi/Makefile | 1 + drivers/spi/lpc32xx_ssp.c | 144 + include/configs/work_92105.h | 268 include/dtt.h | 15 +- include/image.h
