Hi Michal,
> > Thanks for the clarification. This confirms my initial opinion that
> > NEON can be enabled in start.S on a per-board basis, as it would workin
> > all situations -- This is assuming that enabling NEON would have no
> > adverse effect on builds which do not use it, of course.
>
> I
On 10/17/2013 10:25 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi Edgar,
>
> On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 09:37:40 +0200, "Edgar E. Iglesias"
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 08:33:28AM +0200, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
>>> Hi Albert,
>>>
>>> On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 18:07:40 +0200, Albert ARIBAUD
>>> wrote:
>>>
Hi Mic
Hi Edgar,
On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 09:37:40 +0200, "Edgar E. Iglesias"
wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 08:33:28AM +0200, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> > Hi Albert,
> >
> > On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 18:07:40 +0200, Albert ARIBAUD
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Michal,
> > >
> > > On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 11:56:20 +0200, M
On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 08:33:28AM +0200, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi Albert,
>
> On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 18:07:40 +0200, Albert ARIBAUD
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Michal,
> >
> > On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 11:56:20 +0200, Michal Simek
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Albert,
> > >
> > > On 10/03/2013 10:41 AM, Albert ARIB
Hi Michal,
On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:52:02 +0200, Michal Simek
wrote:
> Zynq lowlevel_init() was implemented in C but stack
> pointer is setup after function call in _main().
> Move architecture setup to arch_cpu_init() which is call
> as the first function in board_init_f() which
> already have co
Hi Albert,
On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 18:07:40 +0200, Albert ARIBAUD
wrote:
> Hi Michal,
>
> On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 11:56:20 +0200, Michal Simek
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Albert,
> >
> > On 10/03/2013 10:41 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> > > Hi Michal,
> > >
> > > On Thu, 03 Oct 2013 08:58:38 +0200, Michal Simek
Hi Michal,
On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 11:56:20 +0200, Michal Simek
wrote:
> Hi Albert,
>
> On 10/03/2013 10:41 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> > Hi Michal,
> >
> > On Thu, 03 Oct 2013 08:58:38 +0200, Michal Simek
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 10/02/2013 09:43 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> >>> Hi Michal,
> >>>
>
Hi Albert,
On 10/03/2013 10:41 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi Michal,
>
> On Thu, 03 Oct 2013 08:58:38 +0200, Michal Simek
> wrote:
>
>> On 10/02/2013 09:43 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
>>> Hi Michal,
>>>
>>> On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:38:38 +0200, Michal Simek
>>> wrote:
>>>
Hi Albert,
>>>
Hi Michal,
On Thu, 03 Oct 2013 08:58:38 +0200, Michal Simek
wrote:
> On 10/02/2013 09:43 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> > Hi Michal,
> >
> > On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:38:38 +0200, Michal Simek
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Albert,
> >>
> >> On 09/23/2013 04:37 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> >>> Hi Michal,
>
On 10/02/2013 09:43 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi Michal,
>
> On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:38:38 +0200, Michal Simek
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Albert,
>>
>> On 09/23/2013 04:37 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
>>> Hi Michal,
>>>
>>> On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:19:52 +0200, Michal Simek
>>> wrote:
>>>
On 09/23/2013
Hi Michal,
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:38:38 +0200, Michal Simek
wrote:
> Hi Albert,
>
> On 09/23/2013 04:37 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> > Hi Michal,
> >
> > On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:19:52 +0200, Michal Simek
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 09/23/2013 02:31 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> >>> Hi Michal,
> >>>
>
Hi Albert,
On 09/23/2013 04:37 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi Michal,
>
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:19:52 +0200, Michal Simek
> wrote:
>
>> On 09/23/2013 02:31 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
>>> Hi Michal,
>>>
>>> On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:52:02 +0200, Michal Simek
>>> wrote:
>>>
Zynq lowlevel_init(
On 09/23/2013 04:37 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi Michal,
>
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:19:52 +0200, Michal Simek
> wrote:
>
>> On 09/23/2013 02:31 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
>>> Hi Michal,
>>>
>>> On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:52:02 +0200, Michal Simek
>>> wrote:
>>>
Zynq lowlevel_init() was implem
Hi Michal,
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:19:52 +0200, Michal Simek
wrote:
> On 09/23/2013 02:31 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> > Hi Michal,
> >
> > On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:52:02 +0200, Michal Simek
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Zynq lowlevel_init() was implemented in C but stack
> >> pointer is setup after functi
On 09/23/2013 02:31 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi Michal,
>
> On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:52:02 +0200, Michal Simek
> wrote:
>
>> Zynq lowlevel_init() was implemented in C but stack
>> pointer is setup after function call in _main().
>> Move architecture setup to arch_cpu_init() which is call
>> as
Hi Michal,
On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:52:02 +0200, Michal Simek
wrote:
> Zynq lowlevel_init() was implemented in C but stack
> pointer is setup after function call in _main().
> Move architecture setup to arch_cpu_init() which is call
> as the first function in board_init_f() which
> already have co
Zynq lowlevel_init() was implemented in C but stack
pointer is setup after function call in _main().
Move architecture setup to arch_cpu_init() which is call
as the first function in board_init_f() which
already have correct stack pointer.
Reported-by: Sven Schwermer
Signed-off-by: Michal Simek
17 matches
Mail list logo