Because the cmd_tbl_s structure depends on the configuration file,
it must be assured that config.h is included before the structure is
evaluated by the compiler. If this is not certain, it could happen
that the compiler generates structures of different size, depending
on the fact if the
still coding style issues.
M
This driver provides access to a simulated i2c eeprom.
This simulated eeprom could be very useful in boards with
ddr2 memories and no i2c interfaces.
Using this driver the user can simulate a spd eeprom
of a ddr2 memory and use the ddr2 auto config.
User
It's not this patch contents.
I'ts related with the previous patch JFFS2 support on OneNAND
Anyway, it should be below.
static inline void put_fl_mem(void *buf)
{
-#if defined(CONFIG_JFFS2_NAND) \
-defined(CONFIG_CMD_NAND)
+#if (defined(CONFIG_JFFS2_NAND)
sorry, mail sent too fast...
nand_bbt_desc structure is defined in include/linux/mtd/bbm.h and
iinclude/linux/mtd/nand.h
cheers,
Fathi
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the
Hello Michal
No hints about where are this codyng style issues?
Best regards
--
Ricardo Ribalda
http://www.eps.uam.es/~rribalda/
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's
Please stop to post in HTML.
Please post in text
Best Regards,
J.
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 06:28:16 +0200
Wolfgang Denk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
Plus it's only defined for PowerPC. What do we do on the 11 other
architectures?
Fix them in the first place to do reloction at all?
Er. How? The only thing this thread
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 19:12:20 +0200
Kenneth Johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We could build u-boot as a shared library I guess, but that feels a bit
weird...
What do you mean by that ? u-boot is already compiled with the -fPIC
option.
If that's sufficient, why would you need the
Wolfgamg
What has the MMU to do with it?
Just program your memory controller such that the 4 banks form a
contiguous region.
The memory controller unfortunatly can not map the SDRAM banks as
contiguous region. That IS the main problem. For the SDRAM I'm using
It ends up giving me region
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.
Stuart Wood wrote:
Wolfgamg
What has the MMU to do with it?
Just program your memory controller such that the 4 banks form a
contiguous region.
The memory controller unfortunatly can not map the SDRAM banks as
contiguous region. That IS the main problem. For the SDRAM I'm using
It
Jerry Van Baren wrote:
So you should be able to use
0xE080..0xE0FF - 2nd copy of the first bank
0xE100..0xE17F - 1st copy of the second bank
you will double your available consecutive memory. You can do the same
thing with the third and fourth banks of memory, but you
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 11:10 +0200, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 06:28:16 +0200
Wolfgang Denk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
We could build u-boot as a shared library I guess, but that feels a bit
weird...
Shared? Shared by what?
Hi All,
firstly Before going to boot from USB key, I tried to make working flash
uImage to OSK5912 using USB.
and after compiling drivers/usb/usbdcore_omap1510.c with adding following
macros
to include/configs/omap5912osk.h
#define CONFIG_CMD_USB 1
#define CONFIG_USB_DEVICE 1
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:55:58 +0200
kenneth johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An ELF shared library has the dynamic relocations we need. So if we
build u-boot as an .so file, it should work in theory on most
architectures.
well the elf binary of u-boot obviously has everything we need
Jerry,
Excellent Idea! I will test it right away.
--
Stuart Wood
Lab X Technologies, LLC
176 Anderson Ave.
Suite 302
Rochester, NY 14607
Phone: (585) 271-7790 x207
Fax: (585) 473.4707
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by
Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
board/ids8247/ids8247.c |2 +-
common/cmd_bootm.c |4 ++--
include/configs/MVBC_P.h |4 ++--
include/configs/m501sk.h |2 +-
lib_sparc/board.c|4 ++--
5 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Haavard Skinnemoen
Sent: den 25 juli 2008 14:19
To: kenneth johansson
Cc: vb; u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net; Wolfgang Denk
Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] Changing u-boot relocation scheme
On Fri,
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 14:19 +0200, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:55:58 +0200
kenneth johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An ELF shared library has the dynamic relocations we need. So if we
build u-boot as an .so file, it should work in theory on most
architectures.
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 7:33 AM, kenneth johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
here is a patch to generate dynamic relocations in the elf file. What is
the next step? objcopy -j .rela.dyn -O binary u-boot dyn_reloc_table ??
--- config.mk
+++ config.mk
@@ -215,7 +215,8 @@
vb wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 7:33 AM, kenneth johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
here is a patch to generate dynamic relocations in the elf file. What is
the next step? objcopy -j .rela.dyn -O binary u-boot dyn_reloc_table ??
--- config.mk
+++ config.mk
@@ -215,7
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 16:33:56 +0200
kenneth johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 14:19 +0200, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:55:58 +0200
kenneth johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An ELF shared library has the dynamic relocations we need. So if we
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 17:23 +0200, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 16:33:56 +0200
kenneth johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
now it works as follows. One final static link with all the .a files and
a specified start address for TEXT. result is a elf file with al symbols
Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 16:33:56 +0200
kenneth johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 14:19 +0200, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:55:58 +0200
kenneth johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An ELF shared library has
Hi all,
I have a board based on the MPC8360E-RDK, and im trying to
make NAND at local bus works with UPM. I put the scope to
see what was going wrong and I got this:
___
- the waveform in LGPL1/3 (nand CLE/ALE) should be ___| |___
______
but was
kenneth johansson wrote:
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 17:23 +0200, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
[snip]
There will obviously be a fair amount of arch-specific code required to
make the actual relocation work though.
So the gain of using dynamic relocation is that we have fever relocation
types to
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 13:02 -0400, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
kenneth johansson wrote:
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 17:23 +0200, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
[snip]
There will obviously be a fair amount of arch-specific code required to
make the actual relocation work though.
So the gain of
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 01:50:41PM -0300, Alemao wrote:
Hi all,
I have a board based on the MPC8360E-RDK, and im trying to
make NAND at local bus works with UPM. I put the scope to
see what was going wrong and I got this:
___
- the waveform in LGPL1/3 (nand
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 19:28:48 +0200
kenneth johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was afraid that what was needed was more or less a complete linker but
it looks like if one generate the dynamic reloc table a much simpler
linker(relocation function) is needed. Still probably a lot more complex
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:21:12 -0400
Jerry Van Baren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The relocation information is in the ELF file until and unless we remove
it. Normal ELF executables retain that relocation information... that
is exactly what the L (it) is for. The linux loader (elf loader)
Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:21:12 -0400
Jerry Van Baren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The relocation information is in the ELF file until and unless we remove
it. Normal ELF executables retain that relocation information... that
is exactly what the L (it) is for. The
Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 19:28:48 +0200
kenneth johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was afraid that what was needed was more or less a complete linker but
it looks like if one generate the dynamic reloc table a much simpler
linker(relocation function) is needed.
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 20:35 +0200, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 19:28:48 +0200
kenneth johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was afraid that what was needed was more or less a complete linker but
it looks like if one generate the dynamic reloc table a much simpler
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 04:23:34PM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
Use the common declaration in NAND/OneNAND state
As previously requested, please base this patch against the testing
branch of the u-boot-nand-flash repository.
-Scott
Hello!
I am working on getting USB-uboot working on OSK5912.
from linux USB gadget device controller drivers (i.e.
kernel/drivers/usb/gadget/) it looks like
USB core for omap1510 and OSK5912 is same..But not sure, please confirm
No idea. You will have to RTFM.
RTFM indeed ;-) However,
Hi,
I'm using a 2 spansion 1Gb flash part 128k sector each, so 256k sector size. in
x16, so they form whole 32 bit word.
i came through this code and didn't understand the difference between port
width and chip width.
Can some one explain.
here's what i specifically referring to from
Hello Stelian,
Thank you for adding support for the Atmel AT91SAM9261-EK to U-boot.
But I have a question here:
Does USB-storage devices work in U-boot at your place? (e.g. 1GB USB
memory stick)
I use U-boot 1.3.4-rc1
I first ran into this problem on our custom board from which I derived
the
[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
i came through this code and didn't understand the difference between port
width and chip width.
ok got it,
port_width = n * chip_width
n = number of flash parts.
_
With Windows Live for mobile, your contacts travel with
Hi guys,
how are you doing?
guys, i'm trying to make u-boot for x86
i tried the steps at http://www.denx.de/wiki/DULG/Manual
but i was not able to make it work on x86
does anyone have any tip/doc(s) on how to make u-boot work on x86?
i'd really appreciate that help :P
Kind Regards and Best
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
I think this discussion covers much more ground than needed: certainly
the problem of running the same executable at different addresses has
been solved many times over, for different architectures and file
formats. The thing is that unless we want the
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
I know exactly what Grant did. But he is not using the elf relocation
information as that is simply not included in the data that is the
u-boot.bin file.
So what? Is this a problem? Why would we need to use XXX if we can
perform all we need to do by
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
Ok, I'll stop the chest-beating now. But please stop trying to tell
people that adding a powerpc-specific option (which nobody seems to
know how really works) to the command line will work on any other
architectures than powerpc.
OK - then please you
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]@transmode.se you wrote:
I think the best bet is to make -mrelocatable work for PPC. Question is how
does the other arches do it? Do they include fixup ptrs by default or do
they lack this functionality?
The question that needs to answered first is if any other
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 2:45 AM, vb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wolfgang, thank you for your reply, let me try to explain myself a bit
clearer:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 8:18 PM, Wolfgang Denk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
If you invest time in solving such
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 2:09 PM, Kenneth Johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2008-07-24 at 10:37 -0700, vb wrote:
But as you pointed out, this would work on ppc only (with a 'good'
compiler), and still remains to be proven, I will get to it a bit
later.
I have run u-boot with
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 10:36 PM, Wolfgang Denk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
Maybe I should have been more explicit right from the beginning. I
repeat: forget it. This will *not* go into mainline. Zero chance.
well, it's your call, I'ill stick with
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 10:43 PM, Grant Likely
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem is that the u-boot C runtime setup is insane and must be
fixed. Fix the C runtime and the problem goes away. The approach
being suggested here would have us *preserve* the insane C runtime and
actually
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 1:28 PM, kenneth johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was afraid that what was needed was more or less a complete linker but
it looks like if one generate the dynamic reloc table a much simpler
linker(relocation function) is needed. Still probably a lot more complex
49 matches
Mail list logo
