[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2] mediatek: Fix amount of memory on U7623
While finalizing support for the U7623 with 512MB, I made an embarresing
error and configured 1GB RAM for the board. I also forgot to move memory
from the dtsi and to the dts. This commit takes care of my mistakes.
While I am confessing my mistakes, I also note that I made a mistake in
the commit message of the initial U7623 commit. It is the .bin-file, and
not the .gz file that shall be sent to the device via tftp.
v1->v2:
* Remove redundant memory node (thanks Jonas Gorski)
Signed-off-by: Kristian Evensen
---
.../0227-arm-dts-Add-Unielec-U7623-DTS.patch | 35 --
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git
a/target/linux/mediatek/patches-4.14/0227-arm-dts-Add-Unielec-U7623-DTS.patch
b/target/linux/mediatek/patches-4.14/0227-arm-dts-Add-Unielec-U7623-DTS.patch
index eb864e4657..5908108e6b 100644
---
a/target/linux/mediatek/patches-4.14/0227-arm-dts-Add-Unielec-U7623-DTS.patch
+++
b/target/linux/mediatek/patches-4.14/0227-arm-dts-Add-Unielec-U7623-DTS.patch
@@ -1,16 +1,18 @@
-From 13872b8abfadfe70598c065c19d1db759477c4e6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From 004eb24e939b5b31f828333f37fb5cb2a877d6f2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kristian Evensen
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 14:41:47 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] arm: dts: Add Unielec U7623 DTS
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile | 1 +
- .../dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc-512M.dts | 17 +
- .../boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc.dtsi| 375 +
- 3 files changed, 393 insertions(+)
+ .../dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc-512M.dts | 18 +
+ .../boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc.dtsi| 366 +
+ 3 files changed, 385 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc-512M.dts
create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc.dtsi
+diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
+index 3fec84fa0..e685ce9a4 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
@@ -1062,6 +1062,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK) += \
@@ -21,9 +23,12 @@ Subject: [PATCH] arm: dts: Add Unielec U7623 DTS
mt7623n-rfb-nand.dtb \
mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dtb \
mt8127-moose.dtb \
+diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc-512M.dts
b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc-512M.dts
+new file mode 100644
+index 0..857d440d0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc-512M.dts
-@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+/*
+ * Copyright 2018 Kristian Evensen
+ *
@@ -37,13 +42,17 @@ Subject: [PATCH] arm: dts: Add Unielec U7623 DTS
+ model = "UniElec U7623-02 eMMC (512M RAM)";
+ compatible = "unielec,u7623-02-emmc-512m", "unielec,u7623-02-emmc",
"mediatek,mt7623";
+
-+ memory {
++ memory@8000 {
++ device_type = "memory";
+ reg = <0 0x8000 0 0x2000>;
+ };
+};
+diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc.dtsi
b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc.dtsi
+new file mode 100644
+index 0..adc91266e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc.dtsi
-@@ -0,0 +1,375 @@
+@@ -0,0 +1,366 @@
+/*
+ * Copyright 2018 Kristian Evensen
+ *
@@ -66,10 +75,6 @@ Subject: [PATCH] arm: dts: Add Unielec U7623 DTS
+ stdout-path = "serial2:115200n8";
+ };
+
-+ memory {
-+ reg = <0 0x8000 0 0x2000>;
-+ };
-+
+ cpus {
+ cpu@0 {
+ proc-supply = <_vproc_reg>;
@@ -145,11 +150,6 @@ Subject: [PATCH] arm: dts: Add Unielec U7623 DTS
+ };
+ };
+
-+ memory@8000 {
-+ device_type = "memory";
-+ reg = <0 0x8000 0 0x4000>;
-+ };
-+
+ mt7530: switch@0 {
+ compatible = "mediatek,mt7530";
+ #address-cells = <1>;
@@ -419,3 +419,6 @@ Subject: [PATCH] arm: dts: Add Unielec U7623 DTS
+ status = "okay";
+};
+
+--
+2.14.1
+
--
2.14.1
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] mediatek: Fix amount of memory on U7623
Hi Jonas, On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 10:10 PM, Jonas Gorski wrote: > You are adding a second memory node with the same register range as > the one directly above here, that looks wrong. Thanks for noticing. The first memory node is redundant and a left-over from when mediatek was based on an older kernel, and I had forgot to remove it. I will submit a v2 where only the second memory node is present. BR, Kristian ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH firewall3] defaults: use a generic check_kmod() function
Hi, applied in https://git.openwrt.org/06fa692c80fb2beb69d23d0a2c5cf667aa12f4ad ~ Jo signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] mediatek: Fix amount of memory on U7623
On 6 August 2018 at 19:46, Kristian Evensen wrote:
> While finalizing support for the U7623 with 512MB RAM, I made an embarrassing
> error and configured 1GB RAM for the board. I also forgot to move memory
> from the dtsi and to the dts. This commit takes care of my errors.
>
> While I am confessing my mistakes, I also note that I made a mistake in
> the commit message of the initial U7623 commit. It is the .bin-file, and
> not the .gz file that shall be sent to the device via tftp.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kristian Evensen
> ---
> .../0227-arm-dts-Add-Unielec-U7623-DTS.patch | 37
> +-
> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git
> a/target/linux/mediatek/patches-4.14/0227-arm-dts-Add-Unielec-U7623-DTS.patch
> b/target/linux/mediatek/patches-4.14/0227-arm-dts-Add-Unielec-U7623-DTS.patch
> index eb864e4657..8c0b7611b6 100644
> ---
> a/target/linux/mediatek/patches-4.14/0227-arm-dts-Add-Unielec-U7623-DTS.patch
> +++
> b/target/linux/mediatek/patches-4.14/0227-arm-dts-Add-Unielec-U7623-DTS.patch
> @@ -1,16 +1,18 @@
> -From 13872b8abfadfe70598c065c19d1db759477c4e6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> +From 1ebcba67d45f1365bcb1b5eb8b0cd8c847610ef2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Kristian Evensen
> Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 14:41:47 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] arm: dts: Add Unielec U7623 DTS
>
> ---
> arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile | 1 +
> - .../dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc-512M.dts | 17 +
> - .../boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc.dtsi| 375
> +
> - 3 files changed, 393 insertions(+)
> + .../dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc-512M.dts | 22 ++
> + .../boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc.dtsi| 366
> +
> + 3 files changed, 389 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc-512M.dts
> create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc.dtsi
>
> +diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
> +index 3fec84fa0..e685ce9a4 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
> @@ -1062,6 +1062,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK) += \
> @@ -21,9 +23,12 @@ Subject: [PATCH] arm: dts: Add Unielec U7623 DTS
> mt7623n-rfb-nand.dtb \
> mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dtb \
> mt8127-moose.dtb \
> +diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc-512M.dts
> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc-512M.dts
> +new file mode 100644
> +index 0..6efa6e159
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623a-unielec-u7623-02-emmc-512M.dts
> -@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
> +@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
> +/*
> + * Copyright 2018 Kristian Evensen
> + *
> @@ -40,10 +45,18 @@ Subject: [PATCH] arm: dts: Add Unielec U7623 DTS
> + memory {
> + reg = <0 0x8000 0 0x2000>;
> + };
> ++
> ++ memory@8000 {
> ++ device_type = "memory";
> ++ reg = <0 0x8000 0 0x2000>;
> ++ };
You are adding a second memory node with the same register range as
the one directly above here, that looks wrong.
Regards
Jonas
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Drop unused kernel versions
Ack! ~ Jo ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
[OpenWrt-Devel] Drop unused kernel versions
Hi All, During bumping this morning, I noticed the master already mentions 4 different kernel versions currently .. In master: - kernel 4.4 is not used by any target In 18.06: - kernel 3.18 is not used by any target - kernel 4.4 is not used by any target Removing these would already provide a nice clean-up. Ack or Nack? Thanks, Koen ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] base-files: make wifi report unknown command
Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > respectfully, the behaviour of the "wifi" command is one of the most
> > obtuse parts of openwrt's tooling. It does "something" with no
> > command output, and responds ~instantly.This is expected
> > behaviour for very few people. even "wifi asdfasdfa" returns
> > ~instantly, with no warning that it is an unknown command. Does the
> > command perhaps not take arguments? What would they be?
>
> The (implicit) default command could be explicitly spelled out
> as "wifi apply" or similar, mentioned in the usage and called
> when no argument is provided.
>
> Is that what you were thinking?
Personally I'd like to see the "apply" (or any other name) added,
and the implicit action dropped. Or at the very least, the
implicit action only taken when there are no arguments. At
present, you get the implicit action with no args, and with any
arg that doesn't match some other args. I'd suggest it is more
reasonable that unknown args are not treated as some default,
which is what the original patch suggested. It was definitely
broken however in that the implicit step was no longer available.
Something like this say
This lets "wifi" still do the same as before.
This makes "wifi adsfads" print usage arguments
This makes "wifi enable interfacename" do the same as "wifi
interfacename" did before, if anyone knew about that.
The usage text could/should be expanded still, but hoenstly, I
don't know the difference between them all. What's the difference
between config and detect? should detect be listed in the usage?
what's reload_legacy? when would I want it? Should it be listed
in the usage? What's the difference between enable and reload?
Why is there down but no up? (it's like "enable" but not quite?)
Sincerely,
Karl Palsson
diff --git a/package/base-files/files/sbin/wifi
b/package/base-files/files/sbin/wifi index 83befc0d6f..cbe7e950bd
100755
--- a/package/base-files/files/sbin/wifi
+++ b/package/base-files/files/sbin/wifi
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
usage() {
cat <
signature.html
Description: OpenPGP Digital Signature
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] base-files: make wifi report unknown command
Hi, > respectfully, the behaviour of the "wifi" command is one of the most > obtuse parts of openwrt's tooling. It does "something" with no > command output, and responds ~instantly.This is expected > behaviour for very few people. even "wifi asdfasdfa" returns > ~instantly, with no warning that it is an unknown command. Does the > command perhaps not take arguments? What would they be? The (implicit) default command could be explicitly spelled out as "wifi apply" or similar, mentioned in the usage and called when no argument is provided. Is that what you were thinking? ~ Jo signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] base-files: make wifi report unknown command
> On 6 Aug 2018, at 15:49, Karl Palsson wrote: > > Signed PGP part > > John Crispin wrote: >> >> >> On 03/08/18 18:18, Thibaut VARÈNE wrote: >>> Avoid having /sbin/wifi silently ignore unknown keywords and execute >>> "enable"; instead display the help message and exit with an error. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Thibaut VARÈNE >>> --- >>> package/base-files/files/sbin/wifi | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/package/base-files/files/sbin/wifi >>> b/package/base-files/files/sbin/wifi >>> index 83befc0d6f..09e483ec55 100755 >>> --- a/package/base-files/files/sbin/wifi >>> +++ b/package/base-files/files/sbin/wifi >>> @@ -241,5 +241,5 @@ case "$1" in >>> reload) wifi_reload "$2";; >>> reload_legacy) wifi_reload_legacy "$2";; >>> --help|help) usage;; >>> - *) ubus call network reload; wifi_updown "enable" "$2";; >>> + *) usage; exit 1;; >>> esac >> >> NAK, this changes expected behaviour. i regularly call "wifi" >> to resync my config with runstate. >> John > > respectfully, the behaviour of the "wifi" command is one of the most obtuse > parts of openwrt's tooling. It does "something" with no command output, and > responds ~instantly.This is expected behaviour for very few people. even > "wifi asdfasdfa" returns ~instantly, with no warning that it is an unknown > command. Does the command perhaps not take arguments? What would they be? > > Do we _reallly_ have to keep it's behaviour this way? > > What this patch _is_ missing, is a new command to replace the old > "anything but the other commands". > > ie, the one that does "ubus call network reload; wifi_updown > "enable" "$2"" > > Sincerely, > Karl Palsson > +1 Nicely written and argued. ‘wifi’ is incredibly obtuse and unfriendly. I hate running it. Does ‘magic’ no idea what, it doesn’t say. Cheers, Kevin D-B 012C ACB2 28C6 C53E 9775 9123 B3A2 389B 9DE2 334A signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
