Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] 74xx: use r4 instead of r2 in lock_ram_in_cache and unlock_ram_in_cache

2008-10-30 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Dave Liu, In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote: The patch is following the commit 392438406041415fe64ab8748ec5ab5ad01d1cf7 mpc86xx: use r4 instead of r2 in lock_ram_in_cache and unlock_ram_in_cache This is needed in unlock_ram_in_cache() because it is called from C and will corrupt

[U-Boot] [PATCH] 74xx: use r4 instead of r2 in lock_ram_in_cache and unlock_ram_in_cache

2008-10-23 Thread Dave Liu
The patch is following the commit 392438406041415fe64ab8748ec5ab5ad01d1cf7 mpc86xx: use r4 instead of r2 in lock_ram_in_cache and unlock_ram_in_cache This is needed in unlock_ram_in_cache() because it is called from C and will corrupt the small data area anchor that is kept in R2.

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] 74xx: use r4 instead of r2 in lock_ram_in_cache and unlock_ram_in_cache

2008-10-23 Thread Kumar Gala
On Oct 23, 2008, at 8:59 AM, Dave Liu wrote: The patch is following the commit 392438406041415fe64ab8748ec5ab5ad01d1cf7 mpc86xx: use r4 instead of r2 in lock_ram_in_cache and unlock_ram_in_cache This is needed in unlock_ram_in_cache() because it is called from C and will corrupt

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] 74xx: use r4 instead of r2 in lock_ram_in_cache and unlock_ram_in_cache

2008-10-23 Thread Kumar Gala
On Oct 23, 2008, at 9:20 AM, Liu Dave-R63238 wrote: From: Kumar Gala [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Oct 23, 2008, at 8:59 AM, Dave Liu wrote: The patch is following the commit 392438406041415fe64ab8748ec5ab5ad01d1cf7 mpc86xx: use r4 instead of r2 in lock_ram_in_cache and