Stelian Pop schreef: > Le lundi 14 avril 2008 à 11:19 +0200, Sander Vermin a écrit : > > >>> Do you have a working Linux kernel with a working network interface ? >>> The Linux and U-Boot macb driver and PIO configuration is very close, >>> and if you manage to make it work under Linux you'll probably have >>> little trouble finding out the problem. >>> >>> >> Are all settings of uboot overwritten by linux? >> > > Almost all the settings are overwritten, yes. > > Oke, olimex has a demo linux with working ethernet.. I can try to put this on my board with my current uboot. >> I am not to comfortable >> hacking in the Linux kernel and I had the focus on Uboot. >> > > So you do not have a working Linux kernel. This was my question. > > >>>> Olimex was kind enough to make Uboot nandflash build working with there >>>> board, And deliver sources I cant compile, due to an error: Hardware >>>> float vs software float. But I want a dataflash version because I am >>>> using a BGA chip with nandflash bug. >>>> >>>> >>> I don't see what NAND has to do with ethernet here. >>> >>> >> The AT91SAM9260 BGA chip has a bug, that booting from NAND has problems. >> > > Ok, but this has nothing to do with the Ethernet, right ? If the > ethernet is supposed to work with their U-Boot version, it will probably > work as well if you configure U-Boot to boot from dataflash instead of > NAND flash. > > >>> Also, what cross chain are you using ? I have seen strange network >>> errors when using recent compilers which after investigation were -Os >>> optimisation errors. (using the latest CodeSourcery toolchain for >>> example). >>> >>> >> I am using the compilers from buildroot. >> > > This doesn't learn us anything about the gcc version you're using. > > The official toolchain for U-Boot is the DENX ELDK: > http://www.denx.de/wiki/DULG/ELDK . I don't really think this is your > issue, but when nothing works it may make sense to put yourself in a > well known configuration. > > Is there some pre compiled arm version? >> Olimex has indeed, but that is a old version of uboot, the old ETHER >> driver and not the new. I inspected the initialization code on the ARM >> side, that was the same. The rest of te code is completely different, so >> spotting differences is difficult. >> > > Ah, I understand. However, there must be a difference somewhere. I'm not > sure about this board, but on the SAM boards a software reset has to be > performed once the PHY address is configured to activate the PHY (look > into at91sam9260.c). Maybe your board needs something equivalent ? > > Currently I am using the at91sam9260ek config with the options above edited.
Sander ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
