On 12/17/2012 11:39 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stephen,
In message 50cfa394.40...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
Yes, there are. But your console port cannot be compred against
dynamically populated and scannable bus interfaces like USB or PCI,
and I think you are aware of that.
I honestly
Hi Stephen,
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 8:37 AM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.orgwrote:
On 12/17/2012 11:39 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stephen,
In message 50cfa394.40...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
Yes, there are. But your console port cannot be compred against
dynamically
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/14/12 17:26, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Tom Rini,
In message 50cb8ed1.7020...@ti.com you wrote:
The other part is, take a look at the Allwinner thread from a
week or so ago. We really need to define how we want early board
specific data
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/14/12 17:45, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 12/14/2012 03:22 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Stephen,
...
Perhaps I can make the point another way. Assuming that the SOC
in question is ARM-based and has Linux support it either supports
FDT now or
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/14/12 17:22, Simon Glass wrote:
[snip]
Perhaps I can make the point another way. Assuming that the SOC in
question is ARM-based and has Linux support it either supports FDT
now or presumably will fairly soon. We found that some of the
On 12/17/2012 02:09 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
On 12/14/12 17:45, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 12/14/2012 03:22 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Stephen,
...
Perhaps I can make the point another way. Assuming that the SOC
in question is ARM-based and has Linux support it either supports
FDT now or presumably
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 50cf9baa.3050...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
There are many ways besides device tree to enumerate hardware. For
example, consider PCI or USB (albeit USB isn't memory mapped). I don't
Yes, there are. But your console port cannot be compred against
dynamically
On 12/17/2012 03:37 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 50cf9baa.3050...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
There are many ways besides device tree to enumerate hardware. For
example, consider PCI or USB (albeit USB isn't memory mapped). I don't
Yes, there are. But your
Dear Stephen,
In message 50cfa394.40...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
Yes, there are. But your console port cannot be compred against
dynamically populated and scannable bus interfaces like USB or PCI,
and I think you are aware of that.
I honestly don't know why you couldn't have a
Hi Wolfgang,
On Dec 15, 2012 6:30 PM, Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de wrote:
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message 50cbd313.60...@gmail.com you wrote:
I can give you an example - Remote Telemetry Units (RTUs). They usually
have a number of serial ports. The number of ports may vary based on the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/13/12 16:51, Simon Glass wrote:
[snip]
And from there we can move on and say On ${SoC} we get a
device tree (that we can't quite parse as we don't have enough
resources) AND $some-data (OMDATA or an abbreviated device tree
or $whatever),
Hi Tom,
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/13/12 16:51, Simon Glass wrote:
[snip]
And from there we can move on and say On ${SoC} we get a
device tree (that we can't quite parse as we don't have enough
On 12/14/2012 01:40 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
On 12/13/12 16:51, Simon Glass wrote:
[snip]
And from there we can move on and say On ${SoC} we get a
device tree (that we can't quite parse as we don't have
enough resources) AND $some-data (OMDATA or an abbreviated
device tree or $whatever), lets
On 12/14/2012 02:14 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Tom,
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote: On
12/13/12 16:51, Simon Glass wrote:
[snip]
And from there we can move on and say On ${SoC} we get
a device tree (that we can't quite parse as we don't have
enough
Hi Stephen,
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 12/14/2012 02:14 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Tom,
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote: On
12/13/12 16:51, Simon Glass wrote:
[snip]
And from there we can move on and say On
Dear Tom Rini,
In message 50cb8ed1.7020...@ti.com you wrote:
The other part is, take a look at the Allwinner thread from a week or
so ago. We really need to define how we want early board specific
data to come in because if we start saying we'll accept per-SoC
solutions we'll be drowning in
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 50cb9f9f.5010...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
I don't understand why you think U-Boot is in a position to mandate
that the existing solutions that are already in place are incorrect,
and must be replaced with some alternative.
There will always be times when
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 50cba217.3070...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
Many (most, I assume) U-Boot builds don't use device tree at all
(yet?). I'm not sure we should tie any new mechanism for low-level
boot information into device tree, since that severely limits where it
can be used.
On 12/14/2012 03:22 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Stephen,
...
Perhaps I can make the point another way. Assuming that the SOC in
question is ARM-based and has Linux support it either supports FDT now
or presumably will fairly soon.
Sure, but I'm *explicitly* avoiding relying on DT for this,
Hi Wolfgang,
On 15/12/12 09:26, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Tom Rini,
In message 50cb8ed1.7020...@ti.com you wrote:
The other part is, take a look at the Allwinner thread from a week or
so ago. We really need to define how we want early board specific
data to come in because if we start
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message 50cbb346.30...@gmail.com you wrote:
And we already have a well-defined way to do this, which is the device
tree. So any attempts to implement something different should be
reviewed very carefully.
I'm not sure I 100% get this, but from what I understand,
Hi Wolfgang,
On 15/12/12 11:32, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message 50cbb346.30...@gmail.com you wrote:
And we already have a well-defined way to do this, which is the device
tree. So any attempts to implement something different should be
reviewed very carefully.
I'm not
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message 50cbd313.60...@gmail.com you wrote:
I can give you an example - Remote Telemetry Units (RTUs). They usually
have a number of serial ports. The number of ports may vary based on the
sub-model. Some ports may be RS-232, some may be RS-485 or RS-422.
Depending on
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 1355354590-10023-1-git-send-email-swar...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com
A single U-Boot binary may support multiple very similar boards. These
boards may use different UARTs for the main debug console. Hence, it is
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 50c918a5.6090...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
This seems reasonable in the interim while we are hard-coding things
but needing more flexibility. How do you plan to configure the actual
address - is it with the ODM data or FDT?
I intend to use the ODMDATA.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/13/12 05:27, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message
1355354590-10023-1-git-send-email-swar...@wwwdotorg.org you
wrote:
From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com
A single U-Boot binary may support multiple very similar
Dear Tom Rini,
In message 50c9d41b.7010...@ti.com you wrote:
Where would the device addresses come from - out of the device
tree?
Board specific knowledge. I'd be tempted to add UART3 (iirc) into the
am335x_evm default build so that we can support the Industrial DevKit
variant out of
On 12/13/2012 03:29 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 50c918a5.6090...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
This seems reasonable in the interim while we are hard-coding things
but needing more flexibility. How do you plan to configure the actual
address - is it with the ODM
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 50ca1bb8.4000...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
Arghh... Do we really, really have to invent yet another way to pass
hardware configuration information? Especially one totally
incompatible to any other system?
This is a special case for the console UART. The
On 12/13/2012 01:36 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 50ca1bb8.4000...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
Arghh... Do we really, really have to invent yet another way to pass
hardware configuration information? Especially one totally
incompatible to any other system?
This
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/13/12 15:45, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 12/13/2012 01:36 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 50ca1bb8.4000...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
Arghh... Do we really, really have to invent yet another way
to pass hardware
On 12/13/2012 01:53 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
On 12/13/12 15:45, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 12/13/2012 01:36 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 50ca1bb8.4000...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
Arghh... Do we really, really have to invent yet another
way to pass hardware
Hi Stephen,
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 12/13/2012 01:53 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
On 12/13/12 15:45, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 12/13/2012 01:36 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 50ca1bb8.4000...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 50ca3e7a.8020...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
My intent is that ODMDATA will definitely only be used for the console
UART, and will NOT be used for anything else like LCD, RTC, ... Those
other devices will certainly be configured via device tree.
We've been
On 12/13/2012 04:11 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 50ca3e7a.8020...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
My intent is that ODMDATA will definitely only be used for the console
UART, and will NOT be used for anything else like LCD, RTC, ... Those
other devices will certainly
From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com
A single U-Boot binary may support multiple very similar boards. These
boards may use different UARTs for the main debug console. Hence, it is
impossible to #define CONFIG_SYS_NS16550_COM1 to some static UART
address, since the true value may only be
Hi Stephen,
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com
A single U-Boot binary may support multiple very similar boards. These
boards may use different UARTs for the main debug console. Hence, it is
impossible to
On 12/12/2012 04:38 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Stephen,
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com
A single U-Boot binary may support multiple very similar boards. These
boards may use different UARTs for the main
Hi Stephen,
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 12/12/2012 04:38 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Stephen,
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org
wrote:
From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com
A single U-Boot binary may
39 matches
Mail list logo
