Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> So my question is: which problem are you trying to solve that is not
> already solved by "make -s" or "MAKEALL"? I don't really see the need
> for a solution between no output and full output. YMMV, of course.
It's nice to have a progress meter of what's currently being com
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>> So my question is: which problem are you trying to solve that is not
>>> already solved by "make -s" or "MAKEALL"? I don't really see the need
>>> for a solution between no output and full output. YMMV, of
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 01:36:57PM -0700, John Rigby wrote:
> diff --git a/include/configs/ads5121.h b/include/configs/ads5121.h
> index ce458ae..973f348 100644
> --- a/include/configs/ads5121.h
> +++ b/include/configs/ads5121.h
> @@ -415,8 +415,9 @@
> #define CONFIG_OF_BOARD_SETUP1
>
>
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 12:32:36AM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> So far, it is not clear to me what a better choice for a global
> register variable could be (i. e. which register we can chose for our
> purpose without causing the same or other problems.
r2 is generally used for this purpose
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 12:32:36AM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>> So far, it is not clear to me what a better choice for a global
>>> register variable could be (i. e. which register we can chose for our
>>> purpose without
Timur Tabi wrote:
>>> +#include
>>> +#include
>>> +#include
>>> +#include
>>> +
>>>
>> I think Kim mentioned this will break some architectures. Just repeating it.
>
> Yeah, I'm still waiting for someone to tell me why.
Not every architecture has an io.h and an errno.h.
-Scott
--
On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 01:12:24AM +, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> +#define OF_CPU "PowerPC,[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> +#define OF_SOC "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Do we really still need this? We should be able to search by compatible or
device_type instead of using
Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> Still ? Beats me Scott - you probably know better then I do - I really just
> cloned some of the entries in the other board .h files - which seemed to make
> sense at the time...
>
> I'll have a go at removing them for the next drop...
They're leftovers from before we ha
On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 01:11:42AM +, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> + do_fixup_by_prop_u32(blob, "device_type", "cpu", 4,
> + "timebase-frequency", bd->bi_busfreq / 8, 1);
I don't think this is correct for 8xx... use get_tbclk().
-Scott
--
On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 03:20:56PM +0100, Andreas Schweigstill wrote:
> + /* Validate arguments */
> + if ((argc != 5) || (strlen(argv[3]) != 1)) {
> + printf("Usage:\n%s\n", cmdtp->usage);
> + return 1;
> + }
>
> May we rely on the compiler optimizing the above
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>> Why not do both? Unix untilities do it sometimes this way: Use an
>> interactive check for "scrubenv" but allow "scrubenv -force" not to
>> ask. As many of the U-Boot users know Unix, this would follow from
>> the "principle of lea
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>>> U-Boot provides many, much more serious ways to blow you foot off which
>>> don't ask such questions.
>> Sure. But not by "just" typing one command. Or at least I don't know those
>> kind of destructive commands.
>
> => prot off
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>>> That would be exactly the other way round, i. e. provide an optional
>>> "-i" argument like "rm *" is doing in Unix.
>>>
>>> The default shall be not to ask any questions.
>> rm defaults to not asking questions in *some* cases, bu
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 02:40:56PM +0300, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> commit 0e6e4bbe5be1ef7f601abe7eddbe44b56fd5e43a
> Author: Nikita Youshchenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Mon Feb 25 11:27:06 2008 +
>
> cpu/mpc8260/: ported new fdt code from cpu/mpc83xx/
>
> This patch spl
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:03:38AM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 02:40:56PM +0300, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> > commit 0e6e4bbe5be1ef7f601abe7eddbe44b56fd5e43a
> > Author: Nikita Youshchenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Mon Feb 25 11:27:06
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 02:49:08PM +0100, Marc Leeman wrote:
> > turns up empty for the 2.6.24 kernels, looking for "aliases" in the
> > kernel Documentation does not give a hit that seems relevant for device
> > trees.
> >
> > and the only ref that seems to be on topic is:
> > http://thread.gmane
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 06:10:10PM +0100, Rafal Jaworowski wrote:
> Not really, unfortunatelly: the 85xx still lacks flushing the d-cache
> before disabling it. I was going to fix this by refactoring existing
> d-cache disabling/flushing routines into a common code that would sit in
> the lib_ppc/p
On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 12:06:14PM +0100, Marc Leeman wrote:
> > > Looks like something that was introduced between 2.6.24 and 2.6.25-rc3;
> > > does this mean that u-boot-1.3.2 will not be able to boot 834x
> > > processors (networking that is) with kernels before 2.6.25?
> >
> > No, it just mean
Stefan Roese wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 March 2008, Jens Gehrlein wrote:
>> on 2007-05-16 16:28:05 GMT, Scott Wood submitted a patch with the subject:
>> "[PATCH 2/2] NAND: Add mpc831x support."
>>
>> I can't find this patch in any repository. Even, there wa
On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 06:04:54PM +0300, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> +#define CFG_OR1_PRELIM (0x8000 | /* length 32K
> */ \
> + OR_FCM_CSCT | \
> + OR_FCM_CST | \
> + OR_FCM_CHT | \
> +
On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 05:13:32PM +, Andy Pont wrote:
> WARNING: could not create /chosen FDT_ERR_NOSPACE.
> ERROR: /chosen node create failed - must RESET the
> board to recover.
> Resetting the board.
>
> Is this error a problem with the way that U-Boot is
> setting up the FDT or is it a pr
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:19:42PM +0300, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> -#define CFG_VSC7385_BASE 0xF000
> +/*
> + * NAND Flash on the Local Bus
> + */
> +#define CFG_NAND_BASE0xE060 /* 0xE060 */
> +#define CFG_BR1_PRELIM (CFG_NAND_BASE | \
> +
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 11:31:11PM +0800, 郭劲 wrote:
> I make all the frequency(timebase-frequency;bus-frequency;clock-frequency)
> value
> on device tree file equal to zero, I think those frequency will filled by
> u-boot
> during bootm, but in fact, the u-boot did not fill any frequency. after b
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 09:05:27AM -0500, Jon Loeliger wrote:
> Tsi-Chung Liew wrote:
>
> > + /*
> > +* FEC fix for MCF5275, FEC unable to initial transmit data packet.
> > +* A nop will ensure the descriptor polling active completed.
> > +*/
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_M5275
> > + __asm__
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 09:22:08AM +0800, wrote:
> My board is MPC8360EMDS, my bootm command is "bootm uImage ramdisk_ppc
> mpc836x_mds.dtb", I used the MPC8360E_PB_K26_20071012-LTIB.iso to generate
> above
> uImage, ramdisk_ppc,mpc836x_mds.dtb.
Could you try the latest upstream u-boot, dts
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 08:16:45PM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 17:10:55 +0300
> Anton Vorontsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > > > -/* VSC7385 Gigabit Switch support */
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * VSC7385 Gigabit Switch support
> > > > + */
> > > > +#define CFG_VSC7385_BASE
The device trees for these boards describe PCI I/O as starting from
address zero from the device's perspective.
Placing I/O elsewhere may cause problems with certain PCI boards, and may
cause problems with Linux.
Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
include/configs/MP
, or hwctl are
missing, if the methods that call them have been overridden.
Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
This patch applies to the mtd-2.6.22.1 branch of the nand tree.
drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c |8 ++--
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff
This is a driver for the Flash Control Machine of the enhanched Local Bus
Controller found on some Freescale chips (such as the mpc8313 and the
mpc8379).
Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
This patch applies to the mtd-2.6.22.1 branch of the nand tree.
drivers/mtd/nand/Ma
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 09:23:43AM -0500, Jon Loeliger wrote:
> What do you think? Wouldn't a policy of _always_ using
> braces even for single sub-statements have just made this
> a _correct_ no-brainer from the onset? :-)
Yeah, but it'd be ugly. :-)
-Scott
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_CMD_NAND) && defined(CONFIG_NAND_FSL_ELBC)
> Please move to the Makefile
OK.
>> +/* READOOB reads only the OOB because no ECC is performed. */
>> +case NAND_CMD_READOOB:
>> +vdbg("fsl_elbc_cmdfunc: NAND_CMD_READOOB
This is a driver for the Flash Control Machine of the enhanched Local Bus
Controller found on some Freescale chips (such as the mpc8313 and the
mpc8379).
Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Fixed one instance of trailing whitespace, moved the conditional to the
makefil
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 11:56:08AM -0400, Bill Cook wrote:
> Hello experts,
>
> With U-Boot-1.3.2 and a Freescale MPC8313ERDB,
> I'm getting this message from bootm
>
> ...
>Booting using the fdt at 0xfc70
>Loading Ramdisk to 07ca1000, end 07f419bf ... OK
>Loading Device Tree to 0
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 08:26:23PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> >
> > I think this makes sense for code that we for example link from host's
> > standard libraries. But for code compiled from files from the U-Boot
> > tree (like lib_generic/md5.c), we sh
t; than providing a generic calculate/correct mechanism that can be exported to
> > the nand subsystem.
> >
> > The subsystem should not BUG() when calculate, correct, or hwctl are
> > missing, if the methods that call them have been overridden.
> >
> > Signed-off-by:
neric calculate/correct mechanism that can be exported
>>>> to
>>>> the nand subsystem.
>>>>
>>>> The subsystem should not BUG() when calculate, correct, or hwctl are
>>>> missing, if the methods that call them have been overridden.
>>>
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 11:36:02PM -0600, Daniel wrote:
> I am working on a MPC8313ERDB REVA4 board and need to work with a nand
> device using u-boot. I am using u-boot version 1.3.2 and under the
> driver/mtd/nand directory there is a file called nand.c. In this file it
> makes a call to a func
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 09:12:11PM -0700, gforgcc wrote:
> i am trying to bring up the latest kernel on EP8248 target,
> i am using U-boot-1.3.2 and linux-2.6.25-rc8, i started debugging using
> BDI2000 which helped me to know atleast what is going wrong, i have added
> some printk's in the kernel
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 11:01:39AM +0530, Narendra KA wrote:
>Thanks for the reply scott, :)
>
> i forgot to mention , yes i am using device tree aware u-boot but the
> problem is when i tried to build the u-boot source ( first i did ""make
> ep8248_config"" and then ""make"") it was giving
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 08:36:07PM -0600, Daniel wrote:
> I am working on a MPC8313ERDB REVA4 board and need to work with a nand
> device using u-boot. Are there any patches available to get nand working on
> u-boot 1.3.2? And if so where can I find it.
Patches were posted within the past coup
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 01:42:42PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> >
> > i am trying to bring up the latest kernel on EP8248 target,
> ...
> > Please share your knowledge and skills and help me to resolve this issue..
>
> I can't help with your Linux kern
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 05:34:56PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 10:21 -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 05:11:09PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > Yet the in_bex()/out_bex() functions in PowerPC linux uses sync and all
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 01:34:40PM +0200, Anatolij Gustschin wrote:
> diff --git a/include/net.h b/include/net.h
> index f6decdc..9a2f03f 100644
> --- a/include/net.h
> +++ b/include/net.h
> @@ -412,10 +412,10 @@ extern void print_IPaddr (IPaddr_t);
> * footprint in our tests.
> */
> /* re
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 05:11:09PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> Yet the in_bex()/out_bex() functions in PowerPC linux uses sync and all
> SOC drivers are encouraged to use them. What a waste :(
sync is needed in some of the cases, to sync I/O accesses with DMA buffer
accesses. Ideally, we cou
On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 10:52:27PM +0200, Stelian Pop wrote:
> This patch adds a field in 'struct bd_info' for saving the detected
> NAND size (result of nand_init() routine). This field can be used later
> (for example in the lcd driver) to print out detailed information about
> the board memories
On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 07:02:38PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> +printf ("\tIBAT0L = 0x%08X ", mfspr (IBAT0L));
> +printf ("\tIBAT0U = 0x%08X\n", mfspr (IBAT0U));
> +printf ("\tDBAT0L = 0x%08X ", mfspr (DBAT0L));
> +printf ("\tDBAT0U = 0x%08X\n", mfspr (DBAT0U))
On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 07:02:23PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> diff --git a/include/asm-ppc/mmu.h b/include/asm-ppc/mmu.h
> index 49d6860..f836270 100644
> --- a/include/asm-ppc/mmu.h
> +++ b/include/asm-ppc/mmu.h
> @@ -141,6 +141,10 @@ extern void _tlbia(void);/* invalidate
On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 11:57:18PM +0200, Stelian Pop wrote:
> +#if defined(CONFIG_ATMEL_LCD)
> +#include
> +#include
> +extern nand_info_t nand_info[];
> +#endif
nand_info is declared in nand.h. No need to redeclare it.
-Scott
-
Morten Ebbell Hestens wrote:
> extern nand_info_t nand_info[]; /* info for NAND chips */
> +extern struct nand_chip nand_chip[]; /* extra info for NAND chips */
Where is this defined or used?
>
> static int nand_dump(nand_info_t *nand, ulong off, int only_oob)
> {
> @@ -73,9 +74,9 @@
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 10:08:31AM -0400, Jason McMullan wrote:
> ---
> lib_mips/board.c |7 +++
> 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib_mips/board.c b/lib_mips/board.c
> index 1645f2c..7237842 100644
> --- a/lib_mips/board.c
> +++ b/lib_mips/board.c
> @@ -
Morten Ebbell Hestnes wrote:
>>> + "nand read[.jffs2, .i] addr off|partition size\n"
>>> + "nand write[.jffs2, .i] addr off|partition size\n"
>>
>> What about .e? Is it just for backwards compatibility that we have
>> three commands that mean the same thing? Do we want to document a
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 02:54:34PM +0800, jiale.Yin wrote:
> Our board is reference with the mpc8313erdb,and its design is to link CS0
> to the NAND FLASH, so I have to boot from NAND other than NOR.In
> /board/mpc8313erdb I can find some files, such as nand_boot.c, nand.c and
> nand_ecc.c,
I assu
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 01:26:27AM +0900, Shinya Kuribayashi wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
> Jason McMullan wrote:
> > diff --git a/lib_mips/board.c b/lib_mips/board.c
> > index 1645f2c..e33070d 100644
> > --- a/lib_mips/board.c
> > +++ b/lib_mips/board.c
> > @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@
> > #include
> > #include
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 02:39:17PM -0400, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
> This patch fixes an error when reporting the NAND erase
> progress as in this example:
> U-Boot > nand erase 800
> NAND erase: device 0 offset 0x0, size 0x800
> Erasing at 0x0 -- 6400% complete.
So the problem is when tr
Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
> Scott Wood wrote:
>> That should be an error.
>
> What should be an error, the fact that 6400% is displayed, or the fact
> that the user is trying to erase less than a block? :)
The latter. It should tell the user what the erase block size is, a
Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
> I would be perfectly happy if the mtd driver reported a warning when the
> requested erase size is not an exact multiple of the block size, and
> allow the whole block erase to proceed. Then my patch would make sense.
That's what the mtd-2.6.22.1 branch in the NAND reposit
Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
> Scott Wood wrote:
>> Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
>>> I would be perfectly happy if the mtd driver reported a warning when
>>> the requested erase size is not an exact multiple of the block size,
>>> and allow the whole block erase to proceed
Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
> Either way, I think my patch, or a variation of it, should need to be
> applied to get rid of that ugly 6400%.
Agreed -- the patch in mtd-2.6.22.1 takes care of the percentage issue
at the same time as issuing the warning.
-Scott
This allows the header to be included regardless of whether a board's
config file provides NAND-related defininitions.
Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
include/linux/mtd/nand.h |4
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/m
Ronald Madrid wrote:
> I have two questions. First, is there any particular way the patches
> should be created for the submission of code for supporting a new board?
>
> Second, this is a question for the Freescale maintainers, my board is
> based on the 8313erdb, and will only support NAND fl
Jason McMullan wrote:
> Rewrite the nand_wait() FL_ERASING case to handle CFG_HZ values in the
> MHZ range. This is needed for mips processors, as the timer's timebase
> ticks at CPU clock frequency.
Even though it's MIPS that needs it, it should be flagged as a NAND
patch since that's the code i
McMullan, Jason wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 15:26 -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
>> Even though it's MIPS that needs it, it should be flagged as a NAND
>> patch since that's the code it touches.
>
> Totally agree.
>
>> How about this?
>>
>> if
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>> if (state == FL_ERASING)
>> timeo = CFG_HZ * 2 / 5;
>> else
>> timeo = CFG_HZ / 50
>>
>> If we have CFG_HZ values that are within a factor of 2 of wrapping
>> around, the platform should probably do some downward scaling
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>>> Broken ports should be fixed.
>> Maybe we should define it in a non-board-specific header, so as to make
>> the intent clear that it not actually be configurable?
>
> Good idea. But the change fill break some 100 boards.
Yeah,
McMullan, Jason wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 16:23 +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>> Well, even if this happens, it should not cause get_timer() to show
>> such problems. get_timer() returns an "unsigned long" and is counting
>> in milliseconds, so a wrap-around should take about 50 days.
>
> Yes
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> On 15:24 Tue 20 May , Andy Fleming wrote:
>> ALIGN() returns the smallest aligned value greater than the passed
>> in address or size. Taken from Linux.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andy Fleming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> ---
>> include/common.h |3 +++
>> 1
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 12:53:01PM +0900, Shinya Kuribayashi wrote:
> I disagree with having this structure. Basic strategy for MIPS COUNT/
> COMPARE handling is, let them overflow (os should I say wrap-around) as
> they are. All we need is the Delta, not the numbers of overflows.
You *do* need th
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 11:24:34AM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> this may not be the most efficient way of doing it (I don't see
> git-revert having a --path option), but this will do #3 above:
>
> git-format-patch --stdout --relative=cpu/ixp/npe HEAD^ | patch -d cpu/ixp/npe
> -R -p 1 ; git add cp
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 05:31:24PM +0200, Stelian Pop wrote:
> The nand_info array is declared as extern in several .c files.
> Those days, nand.h contains a reference to the array, so there is
> no need to declare it elsewhere.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stelian Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> common/cm
Likewise with onenand_init().
Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
lib_arm/board.c | 10 ++
lib_ppc/board.c |4 +---
lib_sh/board.c |2 +-
3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib_arm/board.c b/lib_arm/board.c
index 67506b3..5
On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 10:52:26PM +0200, Stelian Pop wrote:
> This patch modifies the nand_init() routine and makes it return the
> total detected NAND size, since this information can be useful to the
> caller.
Applied to u-boot-nand-flash.
-Scott
--
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> On 10:50 Thu 22 May , Scott Wood wrote:
>> On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 10:52:26PM +0200, Stelian Pop wrote:
>>> This patch modifies the nand_init() routine and makes it return the
>>> total detected NAND size, since this infor
The hardware has separate registers for block and page-within-block,
but the division between the two has no apparent relation to the
actual erase block size of the NAND chip.
Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_elbc_nand.c |5 ++---
1 files chan
From: Anton Vorontsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Using current driver elbc sometimes hangs during nand write. Reading back
last byte helps though (thanks to Scott Wood for the idea).
Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
>
>> The warnings are harmless but annoying. Let's fix them.
>
> If the warnings are "harmless", why are you "fixing them"?
Warnings are never completely harmless -- they make it harder to notice
other warnings that point out real problems.
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 10:31:09AM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote:
> On Wednesday 28 May 2008, Sergei Poselenov wrote:
> > What is the reason for doing this? Compiler issues? I see the direct
> > pointer addressing is used all over the 85xx code.
Either the compiler or the hardware could reorder direc
Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> This patch moves Freescale Localbus defines out of mpc83xx.h, so we could
> use it on MPC85xx and MPC86xx processors.
Can we similarly merge lbus83xx_t with ccsr_lbc?
-Scott
-
This SF.net email is sp
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:01:14AM -0400, Stuart Wood wrote:
> Hi All, This is my first attempt at submitting a change so please be
> patient and kind. This change allows for the environment variables to be
> stored in a rand of nand flash. If the first block is bad then the
> environment is stored
rrect NAND erase percentage output
Scott Wood (3):
NAND: Provide a sane default for NAND_MAX_CHIPS.
Make onenand_uboot.h self-sufficient.
Remove prototypes of nand_init() in favor of including nand.h.
Stelian Pop (1):
Cleanup nand_info[] declaration.
common/
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 08:12:28PM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> This patch adds support for NAND FLASH on the TQM8548. It is disabled by
> default and can be enabled for the TQM8548 modules. Note that the R/B pin
> is not supported by that module requiring to use the specified maximum
> dela
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:31:28AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> #define bin_at(i) ((mbinptr)((char*)&(av_[2*(i) + 2]) - 2*SIZE_SZ))
> #define next_bin(b)((mbinptr)((char*)(b) + 2 * sizeof(mbinptr)))
> #define prev_bin(b)((mbinptr)((char*)(b) - 2 * sizeof(mbinptr)))
> ..
>
> #define top
Stuart Wood wrote:
> Scott,
>
> Here is a new version of my patch to env_nand.c. Thanks for the good comments.
> Fixed a problem with the new code that allowed it to read a
> environment area even
> if it contained a bad block after the good environment data.
Please put comments such as these tha
Scott Wood wrote:
>> +size_t end;
>> +int ret_val = 0;
>> +end = offset + CFG_ENV_SIZE;
>> +
>> +for (; offset < end; offset += nand_info[0].erasesize) {
>> +if (nand_block_isbad(&nand_info[0],offset))
>> +
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:14:10AM -0400, Stuart Wood wrote:
> +int writeenv(size_t offset, u_char * buf)
No space after '*'.
> + char_ptr = &buf[amount_saved];
> + if (nand_write(&nand_info[0], offset, &blocksize,
> char_ptr)) {
Wrap long line.
> +
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:15:16AM -0700, Ron Madrid wrote:
> New board SIMPC8313 support: nand_spl
>
> Signed-off-by: Ron Madrid
> ---
> nand_spl/board/sheldon/simpc8313/Makefile | 91
> +++
> nand_spl/board/sheldon/simpc8313/config.mk | 50
> +++
> nan
Ron Madrid wrote:
> New board SIMPC8313 support: nand support
>
> I realize that perhaps these files should be in the
> drivers/mtd/nand folder, but I have been informed by
> Scott Wood that he will be soon working on nand
> support for the MPC83XX(?) family of chips.
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 02:01:09PM -0700, Ron Madrid wrote:
> So does this mean that I need to now base all of my patches off of the
> mtd-2.6.22.1 branch on the
> u-boot-nand-flash tree? How do the two (u-boot and u-boot-nand-flash)
> coincide, or don't they?
> It looks like in the Makefile of
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 03:02:54PM -0700, Ron Madrid wrote:
> So am I just stuck until then, since we clearly shouldn't put old drivers
> into the code, but the
> mtd branch is not rebased yet?
Yes, unless you want to target the current mtd-2.6.22.1 branch (I don't
know how much has changed that
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 06:47:21AM +0800, Liu Dave wrote:
>
> ---
> cpu/mpc83xx/start.S | 310
> ---
> 1 files changed, 220 insertions(+), 90 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/cpu/mpc83xx/start.S b/cpu/mpc83xx/start.S
> index 309eb30..39bcaa8 100644
>
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 03:11:27PM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote:
> One advantage of the current nand_spl subsystem is that it uses the same NAND
> board/platform driver as the "normal", full blown U-Boot NAND subsystem does.
> So there is no need to maintain multiple NAND drivers for one board/platf
On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 08:22:21AM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote:
> Hi Grant,
>
> On Monday 02 June 2008, Grant Erickson wrote:
> > Before I jump in with the BDI and start debugging, has anyone else using
> > 'nboot' and FIT images noticed that 'nboot' periodically fails where 'nand
> > read.i' of the
Stefan Roese wrote:
> On Monday 02 June 2008, Scott Wood wrote:
>> but even then I'd
>> rather use the space for things like SPD-based SDRAM initialization.
>
> Are you talking about a full-blown I2C SPD DIMM detection and
> autoconfiguration? The code I know fro
Stefan Roese wrote:
> This patch removes the SDRAM initilization call initdram() from
> nand_boot(). This is done mainly because I experienced problems with
> some boards like Kilauea (405EX), which don't have internal SRAM (OCM)
> and relocation needs to be done to SDRAM before the NAND controller
M before the NAND controller
> can get accessed. When initdram() is called later on in nand_boot(),
> this can lead to problems with variables in the bss sections like
> nand_ecc_pos[].
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Roese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Acked-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
P
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 04:05:28PM -0400, Stuart Wood wrote:
> Scott, I this this one is it, and thnaks for pointing out the
> nand_erase_opts() function.
>
> Stuart
>
> ---
> Modified to check for bad blocks and to skipping over them when
> CFG_ENV_RANGE has been defined.
> CFG_ENV_RANGE must be
On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 12:09:30PM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> 83xx/85xx/86xx: add more MxMR local bus definitions
>
> This patch adds more macro definitions for the UPM Machine Mode Registers
> They are copied from "include/mpc82xx.h" to simplify the merge of all 8xxx
> common local bus d
Grant Erickson wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestion. That solved it. As an academic exercise, is there
> any practical reason a system would want to use nboot, as I erroneously
> chose to do, without .i|.jffs2|.e?
I don't think so, though I don't know the history involved. Does anyone
actually use
only 8 bit accessors implemented */
> - if (fun->width != 1)
> + if (fun->width != 8 && fun->width != 16 && fun->width != 32)
The above comment looks like it should be removed.
Otherwise, Acked-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
rrect NAND erase percentage output
Scott Wood (3):
NAND: Provide a sane default for NAND_MAX_CHIPS.
Make onenand_uboot.h self-sufficient.
Remove prototypes of nand_init() in favor of including nand.h.
Stuart Wood (1):
env_nand.c: Added bad block management for environment
> common/cmd_ide.c | 19 ++-
> common/cmd_nand.c | 38 --
> common/cmd_scsi.c | 15 ---
> common/cmd_usb.c | 15 ---
> 6 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 57 deletion
1 - 100 of 186 matches
Mail list logo
