Hi Philip,
On 25/11/10 20:11, Philip Nye wrote:
Thanks Greg and Jim,
On 25/11/2010 00:23, Greg Ungerer wrote:
...
It could just be that this is/was set in the 2.4.x code and is not
set the way you want in the 2.6.x code.
On 25/11/2010 00:40, Jim Donelson wrote:
It's also possible some new code moved the I/O registers.
I found the problem and typically it was very prosaic and along the
lines of Greg's suggestion - It's a MCF5272 platform and for some reason
in m5272sim.h the #define for all the port registers is now like:
"(MCF_MBAR + 0x86)" where in the previous version it was simply "0x86".
This meant that my code was now adding MCF_MBAR twice.
None of the other MBAR relative registers are defined this way so I
don't understand quite why this was done, but the code is now working.
The use of absolute address or offset does seem a bit in-consistent
in the register definitions. They could probably use some cleaning up.
(The problem stems from the fact that for some parts the registers
are relative to MBAR, or IPSBAR, and some parts have absolute fixed
addresses).
Regards
Greg
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Ungerer -- Principal Engineer EMAIL: g...@snapgear.com
SnapGear Group, McAfee PHONE: +61 7 3435 2888
8 Gardner Close FAX: +61 7 3217 5323
Milton, QLD, 4064, Australia WEB: http://www.SnapGear.com
_______________________________________________
uClinux-dev mailing list
uClinux-dev@uclinux.org
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev
This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org
To unsubscribe see:
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/options/uclinux-dev
