Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear [email protected], > > In message <[email protected]> you wrote: >> Please find attached the checked patch. Sorry for the inconvenience. > > Please send patches inline. No attachments! > > And please stick to the rules with updated versions - mark the > version in the Subject, and provide a Changelog. See > http://www.denx.de/wiki/view/U-Boot/Patches#Sending_updated_patch_versions > > Also, please provide a meaningful Subject: and commit message - I have > to admit that I have no idea what this patch is suposed to be about. > >> /* >> - * TX - TX_PING & TX_PONG initialization >> + TX - TX_PING & TX_PONG initialization >> */ > > Why are you messing up a previously correct multinine comment into an > incorrect one? > > Please undo. > >> out_be32 (emaclite.baseaddress + XEL_TSR_OFFSET, 0); >> @@ -155,12 +157,13 @@ static int emaclite_init(struct eth_device *dev, bd_t >> > *bis) >> while ((in_be32 (emaclite.baseaddress + XEL_TSR_OFFSET) & >> XEL_TSR_PROG_MAC_ADDR) != 0) ; >> >> -#ifdef CONFIG_XILINX_EMACLITE_TX_PING_PONG >> +#ifdef XILINX_EMACLITE_TX_PING_PONG > > Why are you making this change? Configurable parameteres are supposed > to start with CONFIG_ resp. CONFIG_SYS_ ? > >> - out_be32 (emaclite.baseaddress + XEL_TPLR_OFFSET, ENET_ADDR_LENGTH); >> + out_be32 (emaclite.baseaddress + XEL_TPLR_OFFSET + XEL_BUFFER_OFFSET, >> + ENET_ADDR_LENGTH); > > This change appears to be unrelated to macro names. Please split > into separate patches, and provde information what you change and why.
I have found this old post. Just some my comments. 1. Wolfgang if you see any patches for xilinx fpga and microblaze and I don't reply that posts for a while, please ping me. I am more focus on other things and not checking u-boot malling list so often - it will be better soon. 2. This change is caused by misunderstanding of xparameters.h for microblaze/xilinx ppc boards. If someone wants to use looong xilinx xparameters from EDK/SDK project, not the correct one generated by u-boot bsp, reach problems like this and wants to rename it. The reason why I decided several years ago to use u-boot BSP was that new xparameters.h in board contains just minimum parameters which are important for u-boot. It wasn't and I believe it is unacceptable to add hundreds line with unimportant macros which are totally unrelated to u-boot. Thanks, Michal -- Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng) w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854 Maintainer of Linux kernel 2.6 Microblaze Linux - http://www.monstr.eu/fdt/ Microblaze U-BOOT custodian _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
