On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
plagn...@jcrosoft.com wrote:
On 13:43 Thu 02 Apr , Kyungmin Park wrote:
Hi,
If there's no objection, could you apply this patch to ARM git tree?
Just one question
is the OneNand always 16bits?
Sure as I know, there's no
On 10:18 Wed 26 Nov , Kyungmin Park wrote:
Move machine specific code to smdk6400.
Some board use OneNAND instead of NAND.
Some register MP0_CS_CFG[5:0] are controled by both h/w and s/w.
So it's better to use macro instead of hard-coded value.
Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park
Hi,
If there's no objection, could you apply this patch to ARM git tree?
Thank you,
Kyungmin Park
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:18 AM, Kyungmin Park kmp...@infradead.org wrote:
Move machine specific code to smdk6400.
Some board use OneNAND instead of NAND.
Some register MP0_CS_CFG[5:0] are
On 13:43 Thu 02 Apr , Kyungmin Park wrote:
Hi,
If there's no objection, could you apply this patch to ARM git tree?
Just one question
is the OneNand always 16bits?
Best Regards,
J.
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
Move machine specific code to smdk6400.
Some board use OneNAND instead of NAND.
Some register MP0_CS_CFG[5:0] are controled by both h/w and s/w.
So it's better to use macro instead of hard-coded value.
Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff --git
On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, Kyungmin Park wrote:
Move machine specific code to smdk6400.
Some board use OneNAND instead of NAND.
Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff --git a/board/samsung/smdk6400/lowlevel_init.S
b/board/samsung/smdk6400/lowlevel_init.S
index
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, Kyungmin Park wrote:
Move machine specific code to smdk6400.
Some board use OneNAND instead of NAND.
Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff --git
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Kyungmin Park wrote:
(1 0) - ignored, default 0, so, better set it to 0
| (0 1) - set Xm0CSn[2] to OneNANDC CS0 or NFCON CS0
| (1 2) - ignored, default 0, so, better set it to 0
| (1 3) - set Xm0CSn[3] to SROMC CS3
So, we should just write an 8 in it:
+
Dear Guennadi Liakhovetski,
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
2. While at it, we could fix the value being written to the MEM_SYS_CFG
register too. Currently it writes 0xd =
(1 0) - ignored, default 0, so, better set it to 0
| (0 1) - set Xm0CSn[2] to OneNANDC CS0 or NFCON
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Kyungmin Park wrote:
In OneNAND board, it should be set as 0x1002
Sorry, do not understand what it. If you mean the MEM_SYS_CFG then I
also don't understand this. As I quoted from the datasheet above, bit 1
set to 0 (0 1) is for _both_ - NAND or OneNAND. You
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 5:42 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Kyungmin Park wrote:
In OneNAND board, it should be set as 0x1002
Sorry, do not understand what it. If you mean the MEM_SYS_CFG then I
also don't understand this. As I quoted from the
Dear Guennadi Liakhovetski,
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
+ /* Xm0CSn[2] = OneNANDC CS0 or NFCON CS0, Xm0CSn[3] = SROMC CS3 */
Right, and also add OneNAND NFCON is depends on XNANDSEL.
In the datasheet this signal is called XSELNAND. And I don't think we have
to
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Kyungmin Park wrote:
S3C64XX_MEM_SYS_CFG_NAND0x0008
S3C64XX_MEM_SYS_CFG_ONENAND 0x1000
? I asked above what the bus width has to do with OneNAND selection,
you didn't reply.
OneNAND has always 16-bit butwidth. there's no exception.
Ok, thanks, but I
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Guennadi Liakhovetski,
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
+ /* Xm0CSn[2] = OneNANDC CS0 or NFCON CS0, Xm0CSn[3] = SROMC CS3
*/
Right, and also add OneNAND NFCON is depends on XNANDSEL.
In the datasheet this
Dear Guennadi Liakhovetski,
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
Hey, actually I do think that describing which hardware configurations
the software performs is a Good Thing (TM).
Exactly, which hardware configurations the software performs, XSELNAND
is not performed in software,
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Guennadi Liakhovetski,
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
Hey, actually I do think that describing which hardware configurations
the software performs is a Good Thing (TM).
Exactly, which hardware configurations the software
On 14:16 Wed 22 Oct , Kyungmin Park wrote:
Move machine specific code to smdk6400.
Some board use OneNAND instead of NAND.
Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff --git a/board/samsung/smdk6400/lowlevel_init.S
b/board/samsung/smdk6400/lowlevel_init.S
Guennadi could
Move machine specific code to smdk6400.
Some board use OneNAND instead of NAND.
Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff --git a/board/samsung/smdk6400/lowlevel_init.S
b/board/samsung/smdk6400/lowlevel_init.S
index e0119a7..53d9125 100644
---
18 matches
Mail list logo
