[U-Boot] [PATCH u-boot git] there are non-DM6446 DaVinci chips

From: David Brownell Start updating DaVinci board support to reduce dependencies on dm644x chips and EVM-like boards ... beginning with "psc.c", which hosts a bunch of those dependencies: - Pinmux registers and their contents are SoC-specific, and are also unrelated to the Power and Sleep Co

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH u-boot git] there are non-DM6446 DaVinci chips

On 15:44 Sun 12 Apr , David Brownell wrote: > From: David Brownell > > Start updating DaVinci board support to reduce dependencies on > dm644x chips and EVM-like boards ... beginning with "psc.c", > which hosts a bunch of those dependencies: > > - Pinmux registers and their contents are SoC

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH u-boot git] there are non-DM6446 DaVinci chips

On Thursday 16 April 2009, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > On 15:44 Sun 12 Apr , David Brownell wrote: > could you split it in more logical change please I'll fragment it a bit more, ok. later. > > @@ -129,10 +122,12 @@ void davinci_enable_uart0(void) > > lpsc_on(DAVINCI_LPSC

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH u-boot git] there are non-DM6446 DaVinci chips

On 23:31 Thu 16 Apr , David Brownell wrote: > On Thursday 16 April 2009, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > On 15:44 Sun 12 Apr , David Brownell wrote: > > > could you split it in more logical change please > > I'll fragment it a bit more, ok. later. > > > > > @@ -129,10 +122,

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH u-boot git] there are non-DM6446 DaVinci chips

On Friday 17 April 2009, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > > > could you split it in more logical change please > > > > I'll fragment it a bit more, ok.  later. Re-worked version coming in X parts, which also include a patch changing the cpu/arm926ejs/davinci directory to use the condi

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH u-boot git] there are non-DM6446 DaVinci chips

On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 23:31:12 -0700 David Brownell wrote: > On Thursday 16 April 2009, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > On 15:44 Sun 12 Apr , David Brownell wrote: > > > could you split it in more logical change please > > I'll fragment it a bit more, ok. later. > > > > > @@ -1

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH u-boot git] there are non-DM6446 DaVinci chips

On Friday 24 April 2009, Hugo Villeneuve wrote: > I would suggest renaming (or adding) CONFIG_SOC_DM6446 > to CONFIG_SOC_DM644x The updated patchset I sent includes CONFIG_SOC_DM644X: http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-April/051051.html I decided to keep the "X" uppercase for consisten

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH u-boot git] there are non-DM6446 DaVinci chips

On 12:33 Fri 24 Apr , David Brownell wrote: > On Friday 24 April 2009, Hugo Villeneuve wrote: > > I would suggest renaming (or adding) CONFIG_SOC_DM6446 > > to CONFIG_SOC_DM644x > > The updated patchset I sent includes CONFIG_SOC_DM644X: > > http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-April/

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH u-boot git] there are non-DM6446 DaVinci chips

On Friday 24 April 2009, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > On 12:33 Fri 24 Apr , David Brownell wrote: > > > > (Note: that series of five patches goes with two > > patches which seem not to have merged yet: > > > > http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-April/050802.html > the P

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH u-boot git] there are non-DM6446 DaVinci chips

Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > On 12:33 Fri 24 Apr , David Brownell wrote: > >> On Friday 24 April 2009, Hugo Villeneuve wrote: >> >>> I would suggest renaming (or adding) CONFIG_SOC_DM6446 >>> to CONFIG_SOC_DM644x >>> >> The updated patchset I sent includes CONFIG_SOC

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH u-boot git] there are non-DM6446 DaVinci chips

On Friday 24 April 2009, Ben Warren wrote: > > >>   http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-April/050800.html > >>     > > this is throw Ben tree > > > >   > Actually, I asked you to pick it up: > > http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-April/051076.html > > If that's a problem let me