Bill, On 06/30/2011 04:54 PM, William C. Landolina wrote: > I start with Atmel's vanilla first stage boot from NAND. I have a much > hacked SDCard boot that works as well and that is where I want to head. My > target systems do not have NAND or Dataflash. (I can put NAND on my boards > for development but I do not want to ship with NAND.) I see. I have not tried any of the MMC u-boot stuff for my board (a sam9m10g45ek).
> I hacked the December release to work, but I know I did some things in the > wrong places and in a style that is not Wolfgang-compatible. I stopped > working on improving the December release because it was clear that a lot of > good things were happening to the MMC framework and the underlying AT91 > framework was in flux so it seemed like a good idea to wait until that > stabilized before I revisit putting a modern U-Boot on my boards "the right > way". Ahh, Wolfgang compatible :). I still haven't really figured out exactly what is actually correct with the AT91 framework code yet. I just started playing with this a few weeks ago. There was a patch a little which back which was the reference implementation for the AT91 framework, but I could not find it when I searched my mail box. > I only have one bank of RAM on my custom target so I didn't test the second > bank. On my targets the other EBI interface runs a bunch of slow peripherals. Ah, so dual RAM is no matter for you. Which config header are you using? Naturally, I am using the sam9m10g45ek header, but since you have a slightly different board, which doesn't appear to have a header, how did you proceed? Best regards, Alex -- Alex Waterman Computer Engineer Phone: 215-896-4920 Email: [email protected] _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
