Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Fabio Estevam
Hi Greg, On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Greg Topmiller greg.topmil...@jdsu.com wrote: Fabio/Benoit, I tried the get_board_rev alone and it worked on my mx51evk. In the FSL u-boot version I am using the set_board_rev is: static inline void set_board_rev(int rev) { system_rev |=

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Benoît Thébaudeau
Hi Greg, Fabio, On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 3:00:58 PM, Greg Topmiller wrote: Fabio/Benoit, I tried the get_board_rev alone and it worked on my mx51evk. In the FSL u-boot version I am using the set_board_rev is: static inline void set_board_rev(int rev) { system_rev |= (rev

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Fabio Estevam
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Benoît Thébaudeau benoit.thebaud...@advansee.com wrote: It looks like there is confusion between the 3stack and Babbage boards here: Fabio, the code you refer to in FSL U-Boot comes from the Babbage board, while AFAIK, the mx51evk mainline U-Boot board

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Benoît Thébaudeau
On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 3:38:02 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote: On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Benoît Thébaudeau benoit.thebaud...@advansee.com wrote: It looks like there is confusion between the 3stack and Babbage boards here: Fabio, the code you refer to in FSL U-Boot comes from the

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Fabio Estevam
Hi Benoît, On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Benoît Thébaudeau benoit.thebaud...@advansee.com wrote: Now, I'm totally confused. FSL's website shows a board that really looks like a 3-stack board for its i.MX51 EVK:

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Fabio Estevam
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Fabio Estevam feste...@gmail.com wrote: But back to the original patch: all you need to do is to pass set_board_rev(BOARD_REV2), so that the kernel can correctly identify the board revision correctly. To make it clearer: get_board_rev should return 0x51100 ,

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Fabio Estevam
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Greg Topmiller greg.topmil...@jdsu.com wrote: So how about something like this in the board specific code? u32 get_board_rev(void) { u32 myrev = get_cpu_rev(); myrev |= 0x100; /* BOARD_REV_2 */ return myrev; } Looks good, Greg. Regards,

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Stefano Babic
On 18/09/2012 15:41, Benoît Thébaudeau wrote: Hi Greg, Fabio, On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 3:00:58 PM, Greg Topmiller wrote: Fabio/Benoit, I tried the get_board_rev alone and it worked on my mx51evk. In the FSL u-boot version I am using the set_board_rev is: static inline void

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Stefano Babic
On 18/09/2012 16:02, Fabio Estevam wrote: So, do you mean that mainline U-Boot board naming is broken for mx51evk? No, the name in U-boot mainline is fine and it matches the name in the website. Right. I dislike if the name is different as the official name. As we can see, this generates

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Benoît Thébaudeau
Fabio, On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 5:24:57 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote: Hi Benoît , On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Benoît Thébaudeau benoit.thebaud...@advansee.com wrote: +u32 get_board_rev(void) +{ + return get_cpu_rev(); +} Is this enough? Looking at FSL U-boot there

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-17 Thread Fabio Estevam
Hi Benoît , On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Benoît Thébaudeau benoit.thebaud...@advansee.com wrote: +u32 get_board_rev(void) +{ + return get_cpu_rev(); +} Is this enough? Looking at FSL U-boot there is also a: static inline void set_board_rev(void) { if