Sandeep,
Can you push this change to uboot-ti ?
Tom
1) From the previous discussion I think we should apply
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-August/058492.html
Tom wrote:
Dirk Behme wrote:
Tom wrote:
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Dear Dirk,
snip
I have lost track of this thread.
OK.
Will do
-Original Message-
From: Tom [mailto:tom@windriver.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 3:02 PM
To: Paulraj, Sandeep
Cc: Dirk Behme; u-boot@lists.denx.de; Minkyu Kang
Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] arm_cortexa8: support cache flush to other
soc
Sandeep,
Can
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Tom wrote:
Dirk Behme wrote:
Tom wrote:
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Dear Dirk,
snip
I have lost track of this thread.
Yes, and I'm currently trying to get the track back ;)
When last I worked this, it seemed like the cache routines were going to
be split.
1. generic cache
Dear Tom,
2009/9/9 Tom tom@windriver.com:
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Tom wrote:
Dirk Behme wrote:
Tom wrote:
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Dear Dirk,
snip
I have lost track of this thread.
Yes, and I'm currently trying to get the track back ;)
When last I worked this, it seemed like the cache
Tom wrote:
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Dear Dirk,
snip
I have lost track of this thread.
Yes, and I'm currently trying to get the track back ;)
When last I worked this, it seemed like the cache routines were going to
be split.
1. generic cache routines
2. legacy soc cache routines.
Are
Dirk Behme wrote:
Tom wrote:
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Dear Dirk,
snip
I have lost track of this thread.
Yes, and I'm currently trying to get the track back ;)
When last I worked this, it seemed like the cache routines were going to
be split.
1. generic cache routines
2. legacy soc
Tom wrote:
Dirk Behme wrote:
Tom wrote:
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Dear Dirk,
snip
I have lost track of this thread.
Yes, and I'm currently trying to get the track back ;)
When last I worked this, it seemed like the cache routines were going to
be split.
1. generic cache routines
2.
Dear Minkyu Kang,
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Dear Dirk,
2009/9/5 Dirk Behme dirk.be...@googlemail.com
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Dear, Dirk
2009/9/4 Dirk Behme dirk.be...@googlemail.com
Kyungmin Park wrote:
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 7:45 PM, Dirk Behmedirk.be...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Kyungmin
Dear Dirk,
I have two request.
1. I want to replace CONFIG_L2_OFF define to other function
for example..
if (need_cache_flush()) { /* or !l2_off() */
/* turn off L2 cache */
l2_cache_disable();
/* invalidate L2 cache also */
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Dear Dirk,
snip
I have lost track of this thread.
When last I worked this, it seemed like the cache routines were going to
be split.
1. generic cache routines
2. legacy soc cache routines.
Are the generic cache routines in place and can you use them?
Else can you handle
Dear Dirk,
2009/9/5 Dirk Behme dirk.be...@googlemail.com
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Dear, Dirk
2009/9/4 Dirk Behme dirk.be...@googlemail.com
Kyungmin Park wrote:
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 7:45 PM, Dirk Behmedirk.be...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Kyungmin Park wrote:
...
+ if
Current code is supported only omap3 soc.
this patch will support s5pc1xx(s5pc100 and s5pc110) soc also.
Signed-off-by: Minkyu Kang mk7.k...@samsung.com
---
cpu/arm_cortexa8/cpu.c | 24 +++-
1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git
Dear Minkyu Kang,
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Current code is supported only omap3 soc.
this patch will support s5pc1xx(s5pc100 and s5pc110) soc also.
Thanks for this patch!
How is this patch related to
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-August/058492.html
?
Signed-off-by: Minkyu Kang
Hi,
As he goes to home, I reply it instead.
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Dirk Behmedirk.be...@googlemail.com wrote:
Dear Minkyu Kang,
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Current code is supported only omap3 soc.
this patch will support s5pc1xx(s5pc100 and s5pc110) soc also.
Thanks for this patch!
How
Kyungmin Park wrote:
Hi,
As he goes to home, I reply it instead.
Nice weekend then :)
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Dirk Behmedirk.be...@googlemail.com wrote:
Dear Minkyu Kang,
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Current code is supported only omap3 soc.
this patch will support s5pc1xx(s5pc100 and
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 7:45 PM, Dirk Behmedirk.be...@googlemail.com wrote:
Kyungmin Park wrote:
Hi,
As he goes to home, I reply it instead.
Nice weekend then :)
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Dirk Behmedirk.be...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Dear Minkyu Kang,
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Current
Dear Kyungmin Park,
In message 9c9fda240909040234m4fdd7466ybb38d0d0618cd...@mail.gmail.com you
wrote:
...
#ifndef CONFIG_L2_OFF
- /* turn off L2 cache */
- l2_cache_disable();
- /* invalidate L2 cache also */
- v7_flush_dcache_all(get_device_type());
-#endif
-
Kyungmin Park wrote:
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 7:45 PM, Dirk Behmedirk.be...@googlemail.com wrote:
Kyungmin Park wrote:
...
+ if (get_device_type() != 0xC100) {
Hmm, what is this 0xC100 ?
Now we got two cpu, s5pc100 and s5pc110. In case of s5pc100 we don't
need to turn off l2 cache. but
Dear Kyungmin Park,
In message 9c9fda240909040411w468baddv9cdd59fafeab2...@mail.gmail.com you
wrote:
Do you use the very same U-Boot image on both SoCs?
Yes. One U-Boot image support 2 different CPU and 7 different boards.
We don't want to make a u-boot for each board.
Ah, this explains
Dear, Dirk
2009/9/4 Dirk Behme dirk.be...@googlemail.com
Kyungmin Park wrote:
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 7:45 PM, Dirk Behmedirk.be...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Kyungmin Park wrote:
...
+ if (get_device_type() != 0xC100) {
Hmm, what is this 0xC100 ?
Now we got two cpu, s5pc100 and
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Dear, Dirk
2009/9/4 Dirk Behme dirk.be...@googlemail.com
Kyungmin Park wrote:
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 7:45 PM, Dirk Behmedirk.be...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Kyungmin Park wrote:
...
+ if (get_device_type() != 0xC100) {
Hmm, what is this 0xC100 ?
Now we got two cpu,
On 12:45 Fri 04 Sep , Dirk Behme wrote:
Kyungmin Park wrote:
Hi,
As he goes to home, I reply it instead.
Nice weekend then :)
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Dirk Behmedirk.be...@googlemail.com wrote:
Dear Minkyu Kang,
Minkyu Kang wrote:
Current code is supported only
22 matches
Mail list logo
