On Tue, 2008-02-12 at 23:38 +0100, michael wrote:
> Ok
> E Robertson wrote:
> >> Can you send me your diff?
> >>
> >
> > The diff I'm using is attached.
> > Thanks.
> >
> I'm talking about your adding code. Don't use the mailing list for send
> code.
I've narrowed down the problem to the
On 2/12/08, Ulf Samuelsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> > Once I start using sam7 util, the bootstrap code has not been executed
> >> > which means the SDRAM has not been initialized. I'll have to added the
> >> > lowlevel init to do that, which I might try if nothing else works.
> >> >
> >> >
>> > Once I start using sam7 util, the bootstrap code has not been executed
>> > which means the SDRAM has not been initialized. I'll have to added the
>> > lowlevel init to do that, which I might try if nothing else works.
>> >
>> >
>> You don't understand:
>>
>> - flash all arm9load & u-boot
>>
Oops. It bounce back anyway.
On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok
> E Robertson wrote:
> >> Can you send me your diff?
> >>
> >
> > The diff I'm using is attached.
> > Thanks.
> >
> I'm talking about your adding code. Don't use the mailing list for send
> code.
>
> Regards Michael
Ok
E Robertson wrote:
>> Can you send me your diff?
>>
>
> The diff I'm using is attached.
> Thanks.
>
I'm talking about your adding code. Don't use the mailing list for send
code.
Regards Michael
-
This SF.net emai
E Robertson ha scritto:
> On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> E Robertson wrote:
>>> On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
Hi,
>> Do you try to
>> load with a jtag in memory and execute it?
>>
>>
> I don't have a jtag fitted for this as yet.
E Robertson wrote:
> On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>> That's exactly what I have but I always get this after about 24% :
>>>
>>> *
>>> SEND-class command failed.
>>> Packets sent: 69
>>> Retransmissions: 11
>>> Timeouts: 12
>>> Damag
> When you said new size, I take to mean the size of the binary images.
> In that case boot the Bootstrap and uboot image size are smaller that
> the prebuilt onces.
> Bootstrap is written @ 0 and uboot @ 0x8000 (a 32K size). Bootstrap is
> under 4K and uboot is under 185K. so I have lots of space.
On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> E Robertson wrote:
> > On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> Do you try to
> load with a jtag in memory and execute it?
>
>
> >>> I don't have a jtag fitted for this as yet. I'm using the sam7 util.
>
E Robertson wrote:
> On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
Do you try to
load with a jtag in memory and execute it?
>>> I don't have a jtag fitted for this as yet. I'm using the sam7 util.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Simple step:
>> - flash the w
Hi
>>
>>> Is the new size compatible with the armboot? Do you skip LOW_LEVEL_INIT?
>>>
>> Yes, it is skipped. From what I understood Bootstrap does the
>> necessary boot init tasks (althought I would rather put it in uboot).
>> Do I need to changs this?
>>
>>
>
>
> You
On 2/12/08, Ulf Samuelsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> Hi,
> >> >>
> >> So, do you change the text base?
> >>
> >>
> >> >>> No I did not. I don't have a reason to. Why?
> >> >>>
> >> Is the new size compatible with the armboot? Do you skip LOW_LEVEL_INIT?
> >
> > Yes, it is sk
On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> >
> >> Do you try to
> >> load with a jtag in memory and execute it?
> >>
> >
> > I don't have a jtag fitted for this as yet. I'm using the sam7 util.
> >
> >
> Simple step:
> - flash the work system
> - loady
> put you version of u-boot and
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> So, do you change the text base?
>>
>>
>> >>> No I did not. I don't have a reason to. Why?
>> >>>
>> Is the new size compatible with the armboot? Do you skip LOW_LEVEL_INIT?
>
> Yes, it is skipped. From what I understood Bootstrap does the
> necessary boot init ta
Hi,
>
>> Do you try to
>> load with a jtag in memory and execute it?
>>
>
> I don't have a jtag fitted for this as yet. I'm using the sam7 util.
>
>
Simple step:
- flash the work system
- loady
put you version of u-boot and run go
Regards Michael
---
On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> > Yes, it is skipped. From what I understood Bootstrap does the
> > necessary boot init tasks (althought I would rather put it in uboot).
> > Do I need to changs this?
> >
> >
> No,
>
> I will try to help you. Do you check the new size, format,
Hi,
> Yes, it is skipped. From what I understood Bootstrap does the
> necessary boot init tasks (althought I would rather put it in uboot).
> Do I need to changs this?
>
>
No,
I will try to help you. Do you check the new size, format, etc... The
new size fit in
you flash, do you write somenthi
On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> E Robertson wrote:
> > On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> So, do you change the text base?
>
>
> >>> No I did not. I don't have a reason to. Why?
> >>>
> Is the new size compatible with the armboot
Hi,
E Robertson wrote:
> On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
So, do you change the text base?
>>> No I did not. I don't have a reason to. Why?
>>>
Is the new size compatible with the armboot? Do you skip LOW_LEVEL_INIT?
Regards Michael
On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> >> So, do you change the text base?
> >>
> >
> > No I did not. I don't have a reason to. Why?
> >
> >
> Sorry I think that you talk about config.mk
> board//config.mk
>
> TEXT_BASE = 0x21f0
>
On the 9263 it is 0x23F0 and I believe I ch
Hi,
>> So, do you change the text base?
>>
>
> No I did not. I don't have a reason to. Why?
>
>
Sorry I think that you talk about config.mk
board//config.mk
TEXT_BASE = 0x21f0
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> E Robertson wrote:
> > On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >>> Hi All,
> >>> I made some changes to u-boot-1.1.5 atmel patch 1.5 and rebuild uboot.
> >>> However, after rebuilding it would not run uboot.
> >>> Has anyon
E Robertson wrote:
> On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>> I made some changes to u-boot-1.1.5 atmel patch 1.5 and rebuild uboot.
>>> However, after rebuilding it would not run uboot.
>>> Has anyone had this problem before?
>>>
>>>
>> What type of
On 2/12/08, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> > Hi All,
> > I made some changes to u-boot-1.1.5 atmel patch 1.5 and rebuild uboot.
> > However, after rebuilding it would not run uboot.
> > Has anyone had this problem before?
> >
> What type of changes?
Makefile and config.mk files for my
Hi,
> Hi All,
> I made some changes to u-boot-1.1.5 atmel patch 1.5 and rebuild uboot.
> However, after rebuilding it would not run uboot.
> Has anyone had this problem before?
>
What type of changes?
> If I rewrite the dataflash with the pre-built uboot image, then it
> boots so I guess I might
Hi All,
I made some changes to u-boot-1.1.5 atmel patch 1.5 and rebuild uboot.
However, after rebuilding it would not run uboot.
Has anyone had this problem before?
If I rewrite the dataflash with the pre-built uboot image, then it
boots so I guess I might be missing something. DataFlash is enabled
26 matches
Mail list logo
