Re: [U-Boot] Ethernet HW loopack test

2010-12-21 Thread Guy Morand
> -Original Message- > From: Wolfgang Denk [mailto:w...@denx.de] > Sent: mardi 21 décembre 2010 16:04 > To: Guy Morand > Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de > Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Ethernet HW loopack test > > Dear Guy Morand, > > please restrict your line length to approx 70 characters or so. Yes

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Dirk Behme, In message <4d11a65e.8040...@googlemail.com> you wrote: > > Btw, I tried to send a summary of our issues to the Codesourcery = > > mailing list: > > http://www.codesourcery.com/archives/arm-gnu/msg03989.html > > Let's see if we get an answer. You got one: http://www.codesource

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] lib/asm-offsets.c: Clean coding style

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michal Simek, > > In message <4d119d06.2010...@monstr.eu> you wrote: >>> Please omit the "-pcs" part. It has always been my personal >>> preference, but I've been overruled, and we use plain Lindent these >>> days. >> Ok. Would it be possible to remove it from coding s

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Dirk Behme
On 22.12.2010 08:02, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > Le 22/12/2010 01:11, Alexander Holler a écrit : >> Am 21.12.2010 21:04, schrieb Dirk Behme: >>> On 21.12.2010 20:52, Wolfgang Denk wrote: Dear Albert& friends, what is your opinion? Should we include the memory barrier patch into

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Albert ARIBAUD
Le 22/12/2010 01:11, Alexander Holler a écrit : > Am 21.12.2010 21:04, schrieb Dirk Behme: >> On 21.12.2010 20:52, Wolfgang Denk wrote: >>> Dear Albert&friends, >>> >>> what is your opinion? Should we include the memory barrier patch into >>> the upcoming release (and eventually delay it for f

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] lib/asm-offsets.c: Clean coding style

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Michal Simek, In message <4d119d06.2010...@monstr.eu> you wrote: > > > Please omit the "-pcs" part. It has always been my personal > > preference, but I've been overruled, and we use plain Lindent these > > days. > > Ok. Would it be possible to remove it from coding style page. > http://www

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] lib/asm-offsets.c: Clean coding style

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michal Simek, > > In message <4d1107d2.7070...@monstr.eu> you wrote: >>> These changes are to the worse. All. Why do you think this would be >>> better? >> It is what intend suggest to do. >> intend -npro -kr -i8 -ts8 -sob -l80 -ss -ncs -cp1 -pcs > > Please omit the

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] s3c44b0/start.S: should clear .bss

2010-12-21 Thread Minkyu Kang
Dear Ender Dai, On 10 May 2010 15:26, Ender Dai wrote: > .bss section should be zeroed out after relocat to ram. > > Signed-off-by: Ender Dai > --- >  arch/arm/cpu/s3c44b0/start.S |    9 + >  1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/s3c44b0/start.S b

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Alexander Holler
Am 21.12.2010 21:04, schrieb Dirk Behme: > On 21.12.2010 20:52, Wolfgang Denk wrote: >> Dear Albert& friends, >> >> what is your opinion? Should we include the memory barrier patch into >> the upcoming release (and eventually delay it for further testing), or >> release as is and solve this issu

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Albert ARIBAUD
Le 21/12/2010 21:04, Dirk Behme a écrit : > I somehow tend to leave it as is, too. Agree. Amicalement, -- Albert. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] microblaze: Fix bdiinfo pointer

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Michal Simek, In message <4dcf.5090...@monstr.eu> you wrote: > > >> @@ -91,15 +91,16 @@ void board_init (void) > >>bd_t *bd; > >>init_fnc_t **init_fnc_ptr; > >>gd = (gd_t *) CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_OFFSET; > >> + bd = (bd_t *) CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_OFFSET - GENERATED_BD_INFO_SIZE;

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] lib/asm-offsets.c: Clean coding style

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Michal Simek, In message <4d1107d2.7070...@monstr.eu> you wrote: > > > These changes are to the worse. All. Why do you think this would be > > better? > > It is what intend suggest to do. > intend -npro -kr -i8 -ts8 -sob -l80 -ss -ncs -cp1 -pcs Please omit the "-pcs" part. It has always

[U-Boot] [PATCH v2] microblaze: Fix bd_info pointer

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
Patch "Replace CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE by auto-generated value" (sha1: 25ddd1fb0a2281b182529afbc8fda5de2dc16d96) introduce GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE which is sizeof aligned gd_t (currently 0x40). Microblaze configs used 0x40(128) because this place also contained board info structure which lies on t

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] microblaze: Fix bdiinfo pointer

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michal Simek, > > In message <1292955178-13018-3-git-send-email-mon...@monstr.eu> you wrote: >> Patch "Replace CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE by auto-generated value" >> (sha1: 25ddd1fb0a2281b182529afbc8fda5de2dc16d96) >> introduce GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE which is sizeof alig

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 08/15] powerpc/8xxx: Rework XES boards pci_init_board to use common FSL PCIe code

2010-12-21 Thread Peter Tyser
On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 11:49 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote: > On Dec 20, 2010, at 10:49 AM, Peter Tyser wrote: > > > Thanks for the cleanup. What branch should this series be applied to? > > And are there prerequisites? I'm having issues applying them to test > > and review. Any direction on how these

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Dirk Behme
On 21.12.2010 20:52, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Albert& friends, > > what is your opinion? Should we include the memory barrier patch into > the upcoming release (and eventually delay it for further testing), or > release as is and solve this issue in the next release? > > I tend to leave it as

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] lib/asm-offsets.c: Clean coding style

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michal Simek, > > In message <1292955178-13018-1-git-send-email-mon...@monstr.eu> you wrote: >> Clear coding style issues. >> >> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek >> --- >> lib/asm-offsets.c |6 +++--- >> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Albert & friends, what is your opinion? Should we include the memory barrier patch into the upcoming release (and eventually delay it for further testing), or release as is and solve this issue in the next release? I tend to leave it as is, as I expect that most people will disappear in the

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Move DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR to file scope

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear John Rigby, In message <1292894871-1436-1-git-send-email-john.ri...@linaro.org> you wrote: > It can be optimised out by the compiler otherwise resulting > in obscure errors like a board not booting. > > This has been documented in README since 2006 when these were > first fixed up for GCC 4.

[U-Boot] [PATCH] load_addr: move to common env code

2010-12-21 Thread Mike Frysinger
Rather than keep the load_addr definition with the bootm code (which just happens to use this), move it to the common env code. This way we can disable bootm support completely while retaining load_addr usage with many other commands. Signed-off-by: Mike Frysinger --- common/cmd_bootm.c |1

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] microblaze: Fix bdiinfo pointer

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Michal Simek, In message <1292955178-13018-3-git-send-email-mon...@monstr.eu> you wrote: > Patch "Replace CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE by auto-generated value" > (sha1: 25ddd1fb0a2281b182529afbc8fda5de2dc16d96) > introduce GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE which is sizeof aligned gd_t > (currently 0x40). >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] Autogenerate GENERATED_BD_INFO_SIZE

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Michal Simek, In message <1292955178-13018-2-git-send-email-mon...@monstr.eu> you wrote: > GENERATED_BD_INFO_SIZE represent sizeof bd_info structure > which is used across architectures. > This value can be used in assembler files and macros. > > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek > --- > lib/asm

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] lib/asm-offsets.c: Clean coding style

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Michal Simek, In message <1292955178-13018-1-git-send-email-mon...@monstr.eu> you wrote: > Clear coding style issues. > > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek > --- > lib/asm-offsets.c |6 +++--- > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/asm-offsets.c b/lib/asm-of

Re: [U-Boot] [ARM] gap between _start and CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Sergey Mironov, In message you wrote: > > Well, the newest one I've tried was arm-none-linux-gnueabi-gcc (Gentoo > 4.4.4-r1 p1.1, pie-0.4.5) 4.4.4. But I found it broken since it messed > up relocation-related sections for some reason. What compiler you > think I should try? I don't know

[U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] microblaze: Fix bdiinfo pointer

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
Patch "Replace CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE by auto-generated value" (sha1: 25ddd1fb0a2281b182529afbc8fda5de2dc16d96) introduce GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE which is sizeof aligned gd_t (currently 0x40). Microblaze configs used 0x40(128) because this place also contained board info structure which lies on t

[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] Autogenerate GENERATED_BD_INFO_SIZE

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
GENERATED_BD_INFO_SIZE represent sizeof bd_info structure which is used across architectures. This value can be used in assembler files and macros. Signed-off-by: Michal Simek --- lib/asm-offsets.c |1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/asm-offsets.c b/lib/a

[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] lib/asm-offsets.c: Clean coding style

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
Clear coding style issues. Signed-off-by: Michal Simek --- lib/asm-offsets.c |6 +++--- 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/asm-offsets.c b/lib/asm-offsets.c index 2209561..f1af7e2 100644 --- a/lib/asm-offsets.c +++ b/lib/asm-offsets.c @@ -19,11 +19,11 @@ #i

[U-Boot] [PATCH] ppc4xx: Remove PCI support from lwmon5

2010-12-21 Thread Stefan Roese
PCI is not used at all on lwmon5. So lets remove it. It saves space and reduces boot time a bit (approx. 50ms). Signed-off-by: Stefan Roese --- include/configs/lwmon5.h | 17 - 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/configs/lwmon5.h b/include/co

Re: [U-Boot] [STATUS] v2009.08-rc3 is out

2010-12-21 Thread Jens Scharsig
Dear Wolfgang Denk: > >> But it runs only , if I use the newer 4.5.1 toolchain. I think, there are >> toolchain issues with relocation > > Can you please try and investigate the issue? I found out, that the board hangs if there u-boot access to non SDRAM memory like NAND or frambuffer. I try to

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V3 1/6] tqm85xx: create fixed_sdram() to do sdram setup

2010-12-21 Thread Kumar Gala
On Dec 17, 2010, at 5:17 PM, Becky Bruce wrote: > Also, change this code to use phys_size_t instead of long int. > Using common naming for this function will enable us to use the common > initdram() for 85xx going forward. Other than the type change, > this is just a code rearrange. > > Signed-

Re: [U-Boot] Please pull u-boot-mpc85xx.git

2010-12-21 Thread Kumar Gala
On Dec 18, 2010, at 3:27 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Kumar Gala, > > In message you > wrote: >> [ a few minor bug fixes for v2010.12 ] >> >> The following changes since commit 3ac45988ab1605baaf83bd3acb80a197c9a208c2: >> >> Prepare v2010.12-rc3 (2010-12-17 10:15:38 +0100) >> >> are ava

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 08/15] powerpc/8xxx: Rework XES boards pci_init_board to use common FSL PCIe code

2010-12-21 Thread Kumar Gala
On Dec 20, 2010, at 10:49 AM, Peter Tyser wrote: > Thanks for the cleanup. What branch should this series be applied to? > And are there prerequisites? I'm having issues applying them to test > and review. > > On Fri, 2010-12-17 at 17:50 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote: >> Remove duplicated code in MP

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] microblaze: ll_temac driver: mask of length for newer h/w versions

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
Hi John, John Linn wrote: > The LL TEMAC h/w changed at some point quite some time ago such that > the length field in the BD is used for other stuff also such that the > length needs to be masked correctly. This change is backward > compatible with older h/w also. > > This change was tested on

[U-Boot] [PATCH] microblaze: ll_temac driver: mask of length for newer h/w versions

2010-12-21 Thread John Linn
The LL TEMAC h/w changed at some point quite some time ago such that the length field in the BD is used for other stuff also such that the length needs to be masked correctly. This change is backward compatible with older h/w also. This change was tested on the 12.2 EDK system on the SP605 board.

Re: [U-Boot] [ARM] gap between _start and CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE

2010-12-21 Thread Sergey Mironov
> In message you > wrote: >> >> Compiler: arm-none-linux-gnueabi-gcc (Sourcery G++ Lite 2008q3-72) >> 4.3.2   -- I also tried a couple of other versions without difference. > > Did these include more recent versions?  GCC 4.3.x is not exactly what > I can recommend for ARM systems... Well, the n

Re: [U-Boot] [ARM] gap between _start and CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Sergey Mironov, In message you wrote: > > Compiler: arm-none-linux-gnueabi-gcc (Sourcery G++ Lite 2008q3-72) > 4.3.2 -- I also tried a couple of other versions without difference. Did these include more recent versions? GCC 4.3.x is not exactly what I can recommend for ARM systems... >

[U-Boot] [ARM] gap between _start and CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE

2010-12-21 Thread Sergey Mironov
Hi List. I am working on porting U-Boot to arm1176-based SoC. It works in general, but I had to cut off relocation because of a problem described below. In short: Looks like u-boot fails to link correctly with some CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE values. Board name: uemd Compiler: arm-none-linux-gnueabi-gcc

Re: [U-Boot] git merge summary

2010-12-21 Thread Detlev Zundel
Hi Wolfgang, > Dear Detlev Zundel, > > In message you wrote: >> >> > may I ask again for opinions about enabling that feature? >> >> I also would like to see it. Wolfgang, is there anything that you >> don't like about this option? > > There is two things that make me hesitate: > > 1) I wonder

Re: [U-Boot] Porting Questions - was: [PATCH v2] microblaze: Disabling interrupt should return 1 if was enabled

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear =?GBK?B?09q74Q==?=, Please do not hijack existing mail threads!! Start a new thread, and make sure to chose a proper subject. Please make sure to use a line length of 70 characters or so. And never post HTML to that list. In message <7eb125f4.fad0.12d0964185c.coremail.henrybe...@163.com>

Re: [U-Boot] Ethernet HW loopack test

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Guy Morand, please restrict your line length to approx 70 characters or so. In message you wrote: > > I'm trying to write an U-Boot command to ping the other interface on my pla > tform. This is to test the hardware at production, the ping must hit the wi > re. I got deeply inspired from t

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2] microblaze: Disabling interrupt should return 1 if was enabled

2010-12-21 Thread 于会
Dear Wolfgang Denk, I'm Abraham Yu, here is my first time write to you, I feel so happy to join the U-Boot team. I was porting arm926ejs SoC to our new SoC call "AVT2210", OK! Here is some basically questions below: (u-boot.1010.12.rc2 is what I am using.) 1). First, I am useing JTAG to

Re: [U-Boot] [STATUS] v2009.08-rc3 is out

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Jens Scharsig, In message <4d10bb60.9020...@scharsoft.de> you wrote: > > I have tested the EB+CPUx9K2 Board. It can be compiled with gcc 4.2.2 (ELDK) > and gcc 4.5.1 (buildroot 2010.11). Thanks for testing. > But it runs only , if I use the newer 4.5.1 toolchain. I think, there are > toolc

[U-Boot] Ethernet HW loopack test

2010-12-21 Thread Guy Morand
Hello, I'm trying to write an U-Boot command to ping the other interface on my platform. This is to test the hardware at production, the ping must hit the wire. I got deeply inspired from this patch: http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2005-March/009317.html What changes is that I really want

Re: [U-Boot] git merge summary

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Detlev Zundel, In message you wrote: > > > may I ask again for opinions about enabling that feature? > > I also would like to see it. Wolfgang, is there anything that you > don't like about this option? There is two things that make me hesitate: 1) I wonder if it might have negative sid

Re: [U-Boot] [STATUS] v2009.08-rc3 is out

2010-12-21 Thread Jens Scharsig
Am 22.08.2009 23:41, schrieb Wolfgang Denk: > Hi everybody... > > v2009.08-rc3 has just been released. > > Please help testing, and submit fixes to the remaining problems. > Hello, I have tested the EB+CPUx9K2 Board. It can be compiled with gcc 4.2.2 (ELDK) and gcc 4.5.1 (buildroot 2010.1

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Albert ARIBAUD
Le 21/12/2010 14:30, Alexander Holler a écrit : > Am 21.12.2010 13:51, schrieb Albert ARIBAUD: >> Le 21/12/2010 13:35, Alexander Holler a écrit : >> >>> Hmm, is there actual somethinbg which should forbid the compiler to >>> generate such code which rereads something? It might not be nice, but I >>

Re: [U-Boot] Debugging uBoot with JTAG/Trace32 ?

2010-12-21 Thread Detlev Zundel
Hi Vijay, > I am bit new to this field and my query here is understandably a > bit vague. I am particularly interested in how any of you, who have had > experience with uBoot and a JTAG debugger (like a Lauterbach), have gone > about tackling and resolving an issue within uBoot. > > Speci

Re: [U-Boot] git merge summary

2010-12-21 Thread Detlev Zundel
Hi Alexander, > may I ask again for opinions about enabling that feature? I also would like to see it. Wolfgang, is there anything that you don't like about this option? Cheers Detlev -- 5.7: Practically speaking, what is the difference between arrays and pointers? About the difference betw

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] microblaze: Fix bdiinfo pointer

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michal Simek, > > In message <4d10a473.2030...@monstr.eu> you wrote: >> I would like to do it but it is not easy to use sizeof because there are >> some dependencies in macros in common.h(lines 193-201) because I am >> using CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_OFFSET for monitor/mall

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2] microblaze: Disabling interrupt should return 1 if was enabled

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Michal Simek, In message <1292936565-24677-1-git-send-email-mon...@monstr.eu> you wrote: > Microblaze implement enable/disable interrupts through MSR > that's why disable_interrupts function should return 1 when interrupt > was enabled. Return 0 when interrupt was disabled. > > Signed-off-by

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] microblaze: Fix bdiinfo pointer

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Michal Simek, In message <4d10a473.2030...@monstr.eu> you wrote: > > I would like to do it but it is not easy to use sizeof because there are > some dependencies in macros in common.h(lines 193-201) because I am > using CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_OFFSET for monitor/malloc areas. > > The best will

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Alexander Holler
Hello, Am 21.12.2010 01:25, schrieb John Rigby: > On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Alexander Holler > wrote: > >> There must be more problems. Using gcc 4.5.1, the read*/write*-patch and ... > Yes, you are correct, I see the same here with 4.5.2. I noticed that > bd did not have correct values

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/9] mpc8xxx: Display RDIMM if detected

2010-12-21 Thread Sergei Shtylyov
Hello. On 19-12-2010 1:21, Wolfgang Denk wrote: >> Print a message when a RDIMM is detected. > ... >> +} else >> printf("ERROR: Mix of registered buffered and unbuffered " >> "DIMMs detected!\n"); >> -} > Mutli-line statement needs braces.

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2] microblaze: Disabling interrupt should return 1 if was enabled

2010-12-21 Thread Sergei Shtylyov
Hello. On 21-12-2010 16:02, Michal Simek wrote: > Microblaze implement enable/disable interrupts through MSR > that's why disable_interrupts function should return 1 when interrupt > was enabled. Return 0 when interrupt was disabled. > Signed-off-by: John Linn > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek [...]

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Alexander Holler
Am 21.12.2010 13:51, schrieb Albert ARIBAUD: > Le 21/12/2010 13:35, Alexander Holler a écrit : > >> Hmm, is there actual somethinbg which should forbid the compiler to >> generate such code which rereads something? It might not be nice, but I >> don't think that it is forbidden for a compiler to do

[U-Boot] your mom called me

2010-12-21 Thread Francesca Hardman
Be more than you can be as an at-home worker , I found something thats reces$ion proof, make up to one thousand a day with this article news site i found: http://bit.ly/hq5aMX";>View this article heree ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http:

[U-Boot] [PATCH v2] microblaze: Disabling interrupt should return 1 if was enabled

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
Microblaze implement enable/disable interrupts through MSR that's why disable_interrupts function should return 1 when interrupt was enabled. Return 0 when interrupt was disabled. Signed-off-by: John Linn Signed-off-by: Michal Simek --- arch/microblaze/cpu/interrupts.c |4 +++- 1 files chan

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] microblaze: Fix bdiinfo pointer

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michal Simek, > > In message <1292933384-3032-3-git-send-email-mon...@monstr.eu> you wrote: >> Patch "Replace CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE by auto-generated value" >> (sha1: 25ddd1fb0a2281b182529afbc8fda5de2dc16d96) >> introduce GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE which is sizeof align

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Albert ARIBAUD
Le 21/12/2010 13:35, Alexander Holler a écrit : > Hmm, is there actual somethinbg which should forbid the compiler to > generate such code which rereads something? It might not be nice, but I > don't think that it is forbidden for a compiler to do so. So the proper > way to handle such, might be t

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Alexander Holler
Am 21.12.2010 11:53, schrieb Wolfgang Denk: > Dear Albert ARIBAUD, > > In message<4d1083b4.2060...@free.fr> you wrote: >> >>> And I at your suggestion tried modifying the binary changing the extra >>> ldrb to a nop and it works. >> >> Seems like a compiler issue to me, as the preprocessed C source

Re: [U-Boot] microblaze: Replace CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE by auto-generated value (25ddd1fb0a2281b182529afbc8fda5de2dc16d96)

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
Dear Wolfgang, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Michal, > > In message <4d106994.10...@monstr.eu> you wrote: >> Maybe will be worth to take a look at monitor,malloc area and stack. >> >> Microblaze uses: >> end of ram >> bd 0x40 >> gd 0x40 >> monitor area >> malloc area >> stack (grows down) >> >> Is

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] microblaze: Fix bdiinfo pointer

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Michal Simek, In message <1292933384-3032-3-git-send-email-mon...@monstr.eu> you wrote: > Patch "Replace CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE by auto-generated value" > (sha1: 25ddd1fb0a2281b182529afbc8fda5de2dc16d96) > introduce GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE which is sizeof aligned gd_t > (currently 0x40). >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] microblaze: Disabling interrupt should return 1 if implemented

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Michal Simek, In message <1292933384-3032-2-git-send-email-mon...@monstr.eu> you wrote: > Microblaze implement enable/disable interrupts through MSR > that's why disable_interrupts function should return 1. > > Signed-off-by: John Linn > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek > --- > arch/microblaze

[U-Boot] Microblaze fixes

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
Hi Wolfgang, I am sending two patches for review. I don't expect that someone will have any compains about that's why I have create fix branch in my custodian repo and you can pull them. Both patches are fixes and if possible, I would like to add them to your branch. I have looked at schedule a

[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] microblaze: Fix bdiinfo pointer

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
Patch "Replace CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE by auto-generated value" (sha1: 25ddd1fb0a2281b182529afbc8fda5de2dc16d96) introduce GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE which is sizeof aligned gd_t (currently 0x40). Microblaze configs used 0x40(128) because this place also contained board info structure which lies on t

[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] microblaze: Disabling interrupt should return 1 if implemented

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
Microblaze implement enable/disable interrupts through MSR that's why disable_interrupts function should return 1. Signed-off-by: John Linn Signed-off-by: Michal Simek --- arch/microblaze/cpu/interrupts.c |2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/microblaze/

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Albert ARIBAUD, In message <4d1083b4.2060...@free.fr> you wrote: > > > And I at your suggestion tried modifying the binary changing the extra > > ldrb to a nop and it works. > > Seems like a compiler issue to me, as the preprocessed C source is the > same for the register access and does not

Re: [U-Boot] microblaze: Replace CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE by auto-generated value (25ddd1fb0a2281b182529afbc8fda5de2dc16d96)

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Michal, In message <4d106994.10...@monstr.eu> you wrote: > > Maybe will be worth to take a look at monitor,malloc area and stack. > > Microblaze uses: > end of ram > bd 0x40 > gd 0x40 > monitor area > malloc area > stack (grows down) > > Is it OK to use this scheme? Sure. You can basicly

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Albert ARIBAUD
Le 21/12/2010 09:46, John Rigby a écrit : > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 1:35 AM, Dirk Behme wrote: >> >> (Resend with corrected broken example) >> >> On 21.12.2010 08:21, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: >>> Hi Dirk, >>> >>> Le 21/12/2010 08:11, Dirk Behme a écrit : >>> But the issue with drivers/mtd/nand/o

[U-Boot] [PATCH] update VCMA9 port

2010-12-21 Thread David Müller
This patch brings the VCMA9 port in sync with the latest U-Boot version by doing the following: - do the necessary adjustments to support the ARM relocation feature - use the CFI flash driver (and removing the old one) - various cleanups and coding style fixes Signed-off-by: David Mueller di

[U-Boot] [PATCH] add AM29F400BB to table of supported legacy flashs

2010-12-21 Thread David Müller
Signed-off-by: David Mueller diff --git a/drivers/mtd/jedec_flash.c b/drivers/mtd/jedec_flash.c index 223fb71..da8c9b1 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/jedec_flash.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/jedec_flash.c @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ #define AM29DL800BB0x22CB #define AM29DL800BT0x224A +#define AM29F400BB 0

[U-Boot] [PATCH v3] ftgmac100: support of gigabit eth ftgmac100

2010-12-21 Thread Macpaul Lin
Add Faraday's ftgmac100 (gigabit ethernet) MAC controller's driver. Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin --- Changes for v2: - Coding Style cleanup - Makefile Order sorted - Volatile statement eliminated - Error handling added - Autonegotiation timeout value rechecked - Link speed detecti

[U-Boot] microblaze: Replace CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE by auto-generated value (25ddd1fb0a2281b182529afbc8fda5de2dc16d96)

2010-12-21 Thread Michal Simek
Hi Wolfgang, I have just found that your patch (in subject) break gd/bd pointer for Microblaze. I have done patch which fix it but not sure if is correct. Microblaze uses small space at the end of ram for gd and bd. For example: end of ram 0xd7ff bd 0xd7ff ffc0 gd 0xd

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread John Rigby
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 1:35 AM, Dirk Behme wrote: > > (Resend with corrected broken example) > > On 21.12.2010 08:21, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: >> Hi Dirk, >> >> Le 21/12/2010 08:11, Dirk Behme a écrit : >> >>> But the issue with drivers/mtd/nand/omap_gpmc.c (i.e. the additional >>> ldrb    r3, [r3])

[U-Boot] mtd board tx25

2010-12-21 Thread davide doninelli
Hi, Someone configured u-boot with mtd support for Karo tx25 board? Config file don't configure it. best regard Davide Doninelli ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Dirk Behme
On 21.12.2010 09:17, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Dirk Behme, > > In message<4d105fb3.3090...@googlemail.com> you wrote: >> >> Broken: >> == > ... >> static void omap_nand_hwcontrol(struct mtd_info *mtd, int32_t cmd, >> uint32_t ctrl) >> { >>register struct nand_chip *this = mtd->priv

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Dirk Behme
(Resend with corrected broken example) On 21.12.2010 08:21, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > Hi Dirk, > > Le 21/12/2010 08:11, Dirk Behme a écrit : > >> But the issue with drivers/mtd/nand/omap_gpmc.c (i.e. the additional >> ldrbr3, [r3]) is still open? Has anybody tried to replace it with >> a nop in

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Move DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR to file scope

2010-12-21 Thread Albert ARIBAUD
Le 21/12/2010 09:07, Wolfgang Denk a écrit : > Dear Albert ARIBAUD, > > In message<4d104687.4030...@free.fr> you wrote: >> Le 21/12/2010 02:27, John Rigby a =E9crit : >>> It can be optimised out by the compiler otherwise resulting >>> in obscure errors like a board not booting. >>> >>> This has be

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Dirk Behme, In message <4d105fb3.3090...@googlemail.com> you wrote: > > Broken: > == ... > static void omap_nand_hwcontrol(struct mtd_info *mtd, int32_t cmd, > uint32_t ctrl) > { > register struct nand_chip *this = mtd->priv; > ... > if (cmd != -1) >({ do { } while (0); (*(vo

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Move DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR to file scope

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Albert ARIBAUD, In message <4d104687.4030...@free.fr> you wrote: > Le 21/12/2010 02:27, John Rigby a =E9crit : > > It can be optimised out by the compiler otherwise resulting > > in obscure errors like a board not booting. > > > > This has been documented in README since 2006 when these were

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Move DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR to file scope

2010-12-21 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear John Rigby, In message <1292894871-1436-1-git-send-email-john.ri...@linaro.org> you wrote: > It can be optimised out by the compiler otherwise resulting > in obscure errors like a board not booting. > > This has been documented in README since 2006 when these were > first fixed up for GCC 4.

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.

2010-12-21 Thread Dirk Behme
On 21.12.2010 08:21, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > Hi Dirk, > > Le 21/12/2010 08:11, Dirk Behme a écrit : > >> But the issue with drivers/mtd/nand/omap_gpmc.c (i.e. the additional >> ldrbr3, [r3]) is still open? Has anybody tried to replace it with >> a nop in the binary to be sure this is the root c