Hi,
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Wolfgang,
>
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 6:25 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>> Dear Simon Glass,
>>
>> In message
>> you
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > To be honest, I think gd should only be a temporary structure used to
>>> > carry specific data throu
Hi Wolfgang,
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 6:25 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Simon Glass,
>
> In message
> you
> wrote:
>>
>> > To be honest, I think gd should only be a temporary structure used to
>> > carry specific data through the initialisation process up to the point
>> > BSS becomes availab
Hi Wolfgang,
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Graeme Russ,
>
> In message
> you
> wrote:
>>
>> I agree. While gd->arch does look a bit 'ugly', it immediately unlocks
>> the path forward to unifying the init loop. The x86 board.c would be a
>> good start (IMNSHO) by
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message
you wrote:
>
> I agree. While gd->arch does look a bit 'ugly', it immediately unlocks
> the path forward to unifying the init loop. The x86 board.c would be a
> good start (IMNSHO) by simply making the init sequence arrays extern.
> From there we can tackle what rea
Dear Simon Glass,
In message
you wrote:
>
> > To be honest, I think gd should only be a temporary structure used to
> > carry specific data through the initialisation process up to the point
> > BSS becomes available. With the 'early malloc' patches in the
> > pipeline, it might even be possibl
Dear Tom,
In message <20121203145414.GE15777@bill-the-cat> you wrote:
>
> > > - The change makes the code less readable. Reading "gd->arch."
> > > instead of plain "gd->" is no improvements, but rather vice versa.
> > > If we really go this way, this should be improved.
> >
> > Yes it would
Dear Simon,
In message
you wrote:
>
> The discussion at the time was here:
>
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/146798/
>
> My previous effort to create a generic board init basically fell over
> on this point. Do you agree with the analysis and proposal on that
> thread?
Mostly; but some q
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message
you
wrote:
>
> I've mentioned this before - I think gd is being abused. To me, gd
> should contain only data members that are explicitly required prior to
> SDRAM being initialised and BSS being available. It has become a bit
> of a 'well I need this variable every
Hi Tom,
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 12/03/12 17:19, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi Graeme,
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Graeme Russ
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Tom, Simon, Wolfgang,
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 1:54 AM, Tom
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/03/12 17:19, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Graeme,
>
> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Graeme Russ
> wrote:
>> Hi Tom, Simon, Wolfgang,
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 1:54 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 06:06:30AM -0800, Simon Glass
Hi Graeme,
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Tom, Simon, Wolfgang,
>
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 1:54 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 06:06:30AM -0800, Simon Glass wrote:
>>> Hi Wolfgang,
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>> > Dear
Hi Tom, Simon, Wolfgang,
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 1:54 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 06:06:30AM -0800, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi Wolfgang,
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>> > Dear Simon Glass,
>> >
>> > In message <1353100842-20126-1-git-send-email-...@
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 06:06:30AM -0800, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Wolfgang,
>
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Dear Simon Glass,
> >
> > In message <1353100842-20126-1-git-send-email-...@chromium.org> you wrote:
> >> The previous generic board series hit a snag in that
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Wolfgang,
>
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>> Dear Simon Glass,
>>
>> In message <1353100842-20126-1-git-send-email-...@chromium.org> you wrote:
>>> The previous generic board series hit a snag in that we need
Hi Wolfgang,
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Simon Glass,
>
> In message <1353100842-20126-1-git-send-email-...@chromium.org> you wrote:
>> The previous generic board series hit a snag in that we needed generic
>> code to access some of the architecture-specific fiel
Dear Simon Glass,
In message <1353100842-20126-1-git-send-email-...@chromium.org> you wrote:
> The previous generic board series hit a snag in that we needed generic
> code to access some of the architecture-specific fields in global_data.
I missed that. Can you please summarize what exactly the
The previous generic board series hit a snag in that we needed generic
code to access some of the architecture-specific fields in global_data.
The solution eventually arrived at was to move these fields into a
separate structure, so that global_data has the generic fields,
and within that there is
17 matches
Mail list logo
