On 6/10/08, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:05 AM, Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Maybe everything in this small piece of my dts is wrong. But I don't know
> how
> > the correct way is. All I want is to define a 32MiB flash at the end if the
>
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:05 AM, Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe everything in this small piece of my dts is wrong. But I don't know how
> the correct way is. All I want is to define a 32MiB flash at the end if the
> address space of my MPC5200B based system.
>
>[...]
>
Maybe everything in this small piece of my dts is wrong. But I don't know how
the correct way is. All I want is to define a 32MiB flash at the end if the
address space of my MPC5200B based system.
[...]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] {
model = "fsl,lpb";
compatib
Jon,
hmm, I tried the same, but with a 32MiB flash instead. And Linux-2.6.26-rc5
and the dtc-1.1.0.
On Monday 09 June 2008 23:30, Jon Smirl wrote:
> This is my boot log:
>
> ff00.flash: Found 1 x16 devices at 0x0 in 16-bit bank
> Intel/Sharp Extended Query Table at 0x0031
> Using buffer wri
On 6/9/08, Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 08 June 2008 21:08, Jon Smirl wrote:
> > What about the flash on the local bus? Could we use something like
> > this, or the same without the partition data?
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> > compatible = "fsl
On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 03:08:33PM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote:
> There should be an i2c entry for the eeprom but I don't know the part
> number for it.
Wolfram has oftree bindings for the new at24 driver which will be used
in combination with this board. For patches, please see the i2c list.
Robert
-
On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 11:13:35AM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> I think partitions shouldn't go into the default device tree, as people
> may have different partitioning.
It is also a chicken-and-egg thing, because the oftree would describe
the partition it is in.
Robert
--
Dipl.-Ing. Robert Sc
On Sunday 08 June 2008 21:08, Jon Smirl wrote:
> What about the flash on the local bus? Could we use something like
> this, or the same without the partition data?
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> compatible = "fsl,lpb";
> ranges = <0 ff00 0100>;
>
>
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 1:56 AM, Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 09 June 2008 01:28, Grant Likely wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 1:08 PM, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Device tree has an entry for AC97 on PSC1. I don't think the Phytec
>> > module or carrier boar
Jon,
On Monday 09 June 2008 14:37, Jon Smirl wrote:
> On 6/9/08, Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Device tree has an entry for AC97 on PSC1. I don't think the Phytec
> > > > module or carrier board has AC97 hardware.
> > >
> > > Might be a bug
> >
> > NACK. The baseboard for
On 6/9/08, Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 09 June 2008 01:28, Grant Likely wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 1:08 PM, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Why not a compatible field in the top of the tree? Then you wouldn't
> > > need to list the boards in mpc5200_s
On 6/9/08, Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Device tree has an entry for AC97 on PSC1. I don't think the Phytec
> > > module or carrier board has AC97 hardware.
> >
> > Might be a bug
>
>
> NACK. The baseboard for the pcm030 CPU board has AC97 hardware connected to
> PSC1. And
Hi,
On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 03:08:33PM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote:
> Why not a compatible field in the top of the tree? Then you wouldn't
> need to list the boards in mpc5200_simple.c.
> compatible = "phytec,pcm030","simple-mpc5200";
>
> Device tree has an entry for AC97 on PSC1. I don't think
On Monday 09 June 2008 01:28, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 1:08 PM, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Why not a compatible field in the top of the tree? Then you wouldn't
> > need to list the boards in mpc5200_simple.c.
> >compatible = "phytec,pcm030","simple-mpc5200"
On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 1:08 PM, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why not a compatible field in the top of the tree? Then you wouldn't
> need to list the boards in mpc5200_simple.c.
>compatible = "phytec,pcm030","simple-mpc5200";
Here's the problem; what does compatible really mean at
Why not a compatible field in the top of the tree? Then you wouldn't
need to list the boards in mpc5200_simple.c.
compatible = "phytec,pcm030","simple-mpc5200";
Device tree has an entry for AC97 on PSC1. I don't think the Phytec
module or carrier board has AC97 hardware.
The RTC chip says
16 matches
Mail list logo
