Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/7] omap/spl: don't assume u-boot.bin size, use CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_SIZE

2011-10-31 Thread Ilya Yanok
Hi Tom, All, On 18.10.2011 03:43, Tom Rini wrote: Don't hardcode u-boot.bin size for the case where mkimage signature is missing, use CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_SIZE for this. Signed-off-by: Ilya Yanok ya...@emcraft.com So what about this patch? Should I drop it? Regards, Ilya.

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/7] omap/spl: don't assume u-boot.bin size, use CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_SIZE

2011-10-31 Thread Tom Rini
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Ilya Yanok ya...@emcraft.com wrote: Hi Tom, All, On 18.10.2011 03:43, Tom Rini wrote: Don't hardcode u-boot.bin size for the case where mkimage signature is missing, use CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_SIZE for this. Signed-off-by: Ilya Yanok ya...@emcraft.com So

[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/7] omap/spl: don't assume u-boot.bin size, use CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_SIZE

2011-10-17 Thread Ilya Yanok
Don't hardcode u-boot.bin size for the case where mkimage signature is missing, use CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_SIZE for this. Signed-off-by: Ilya Yanok ya...@emcraft.com --- arch/arm/cpu/armv7/omap-common/spl.c |3 +-- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/7] omap/spl: don't assume u-boot.bin size, use CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_SIZE

2011-10-17 Thread Tom Rini
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Ilya Yanok ya...@emcraft.com wrote: Don't hardcode u-boot.bin size for the case where mkimage signature is missing, use CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_SIZE for this. Signed-off-by: Ilya Yanok ya...@emcraft.com I don't like this since it means we need to always define

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/7] omap/spl: don't assume u-boot.bin size, use CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_SIZE

2011-10-17 Thread Ilya Yanok
Hi Tom, On 18.10.2011 03:43, Tom Rini wrote: Don't hardcode u-boot.bin size for the case where mkimage signature is missing, use CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_SIZE for this. Signed-off-by: Ilya Yanok ya...@emcraft.com I don't like this since it means we need to always define this variable when