Re: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 1/1] Add support for ATMELAT91SAM9G20EK board

2008-07-26 Thread Haavard Skinnemoen
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 17:44:52 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But since we already have a CONFIG_AVR32 #define, we can clean up the mess in macb.c by simply reversing the logic. If CONFIG_AVR32 can be used in macb.c without ofuscation, why is CONFIG_AT91 needed here? However, simply

Re: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 1/1] Add support for ATMELAT91SAM9G20EK board

2008-07-25 Thread Haavard Skinnemoen
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 13:14:02 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: U-Boot already has too many preprocessor constants and the addition of another (perhaps) dubious one merits more debate. I don't completely agree. U-Boot has too many #ifdefs, which isn't necessarily the same as too many #defines.

Re: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 1/1] Add support for ATMELAT91SAM9G20EK board

2008-07-25 Thread Ken.Fuchs
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: U-Boot already has too many preprocessor constants and the addition of another (perhaps) dubious one merits more debate. You omitted the context of this statement and hence most of its meaning. Haavard Skinnemoen wrote: I don't completely agree. U-Boot has too

Re: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 1/1] Add support for ATMELAT91SAM9G20EK board

2008-07-24 Thread Ken.Fuchs
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: /* choose RMII or MII mode. This depends on the board */ #ifdef CONFIG_RMII #if defined(CONFIG_AT91CAP9) || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9260) || \ -defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9263) +defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9263) || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G20)