In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
>
> > +#define CONFIG_NETMASK 255.255.255.0
> > +#define CONFIG_IPADDR 192.168.10.100
> > +#define CONFIG_SERVERIP192.168.10.77
> > +#define CONFIG_GATEWAYIP 192.168.10.77
> > +#define CONFIG_ETHADDR
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> I have some requirement to debug a patch based on u-boot 1.1.3, could u
> please let me know how to revert from the current git tree and get to the
> 1.1.3 version.
man git
or here:
git-checkout U-Boot-1_1_3
> --=_Part_429_2878
update comments
Fix coding style
Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff --git a/api/api_storage.c b/api/api_storage.c
index 7cd4efb..7e63240 100644
--- a/api/api_storage.c
+++ b/api/api_storage.c
@@ -61,21 +61,21 @@ static struct stor_spec specs[ENUM_MAX] = { { 0
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 11:10:35 +0530
"Manish Jaggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I have some requirement to debug a patch based on u-boot 1.1.3, could
> u please let me know how to revert from the current git tree and get
> to the 1.1.3 version.
First of all, please don't start a new
Hi, Goda-san.
2008/1/25, goda.yusuke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Migo-R is a board based on SH7722 and has may devices.
> In this patch, supported SCIF, NOR flash and Ethernet.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yusuke Goda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> diff --git a/board/MigoR/migo_r.c b/board/MigoR/migo_r.c
> new file mo
Migo-R is a board based on SH7722 and has may devices.
In this patch, supported SCIF, NOR flash and Ethernet.
Signed-off-by: Yusuke Goda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
MAINTAINERS |4 +
MAKEALL |1 +
Makefile|5 +
board/MigoR/Makefile
Hi All,
I have some requirement to debug a patch based on u-boot 1.1.3, could u
please let me know how to revert from the current git tree and get to the
1.1.3 version.
Thanks
Manish
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Micr
On Jan 23, 2008, at 8:43 AM, Marian Balakowicz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is a second patchset for new uImage, it includes architecture
> file
> renames, removals of OF_FLAT_TREE and standalone application support
> and
> further code refactoring.
>
> This patchset is based on patchset1. MAKEALL w
Grant Likely wrote:
> On 1/23/08, Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Dear Jon,
>>
>> in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>>> In the spirit of the Linux and Git build systems,
>>> I have a modified U-Boot build system that supports
>>> a much more concise output! One of the primary
>
On Jan 24, 2008 3:14 AM, Marian Balakowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Standalone applications are supposed to be run using the "go" command.
> >> This patch removes standalone images handling from the do_bootm().
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Marian Balakowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > For me ha
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>> So my question is: which problem are you trying to solve that is not
>>> already solved by "make -s" or "MAKEALL"? I don't really see the need
>>> for a solution between no output and full output. YMMV, of
On 1/23/08, Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Jon,
>
> in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> >
> > In the spirit of the Linux and Git build systems,
> > I have a modified U-Boot build system that supports
> > a much more concise output! One of the primary
> > motivations for th
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > So my question is: which problem are you trying to solve that is not
> > already solved by "make -s" or "MAKEALL"? I don't really see the need
> > for a solution between no output and full output. YMMV, of course.
>
> It's nice
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/toledo/u-boot$ make all
> Generating include/autoconf.mk
> ppc_8xx-gcc: compilation of header file requested
Please use recent code instead, or a more recent toolchain.
Best rega
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> 1) also i made a change in the Makefile show above which made me wonder if
> using ppc_8xx as the default for all ppc board is a correct assumption ?
It's a pretty good default, as you can build all existing PPC targets
with it, and 90% of them will
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> So my question is: which problem are you trying to solve that is not
> already solved by "make -s" or "MAKEALL"? I don't really see the need
> for a solution between no output and full output. YMMV, of course.
It's nice to have a progress meter of what's currently being com
Thanks, TsiChung. With the patches you emailed me it worked fine. It must
have been a problem with the way I was creating the patch files, although I
still can't see a difference between my files and yours. What I was doing
was copy-pasting from gmail to gedit, and I guess that is messing with
n
David,
Make sure your patch is wrap text when you export or save as from email.
Aso, make sure your patches do not contain (CR+LF) newlines.
unwrap text in your patch:
...
8 files changed, 849 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644
board/freescale/m5275evb/Makefile create mode
I Would Dream http://82.158.158.122/
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
___
Let mtest cover the whole SDRAM except the last megabyte, which is
where u-boot lives.
Signed-off-by: Haavard Skinnemoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
include/configs/atngw100.h | 10 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/configs/atngw100.h b/include/config
The following 5 patches contain relatively minor fixes for the AVR32
architecture and related boards.
As per the recent discussion on u-boot-users about Custodian workflow,
I've also pushed out this series to the "avr32-fixes" branch on
git://www.denx.de/git/u-boot-avr32.git avr32-fixes
The default load address is SDRAM + 2MB, not SDRAM + 4MB. The latter
wouldn't have worked anyway since the board can only access 4MB of
SDRAM.
Signed-off-by: Haavard Skinnemoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
include/configs/atstk1004.h |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --
The (now obsolete) atngw100 flash programming code was having problems
programming the onboard at49bv642 chip. The atstk1000 flash
programming code may have the same bug, so import fix for this problem
from the AVR32 Linux BSP.
Signed-off-by: Haavard Skinnemoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
board/atmel
The existing code assumes the SDRAM row refresh period should always
be 15.6 us. This is not always true, and indeed on the ATNGW100, the
refresh rate should really be 7.81 us.
Add a refresh_period member to struct sdram_info and initialize it
properly for both ATSTK1000 and ATNGW100. Out-of-tree
Many people run into problems when they compile a big kernel and load
the uImage at the default SDRAM + 2MB address as the kernel will
overwrite the uImage as it is being unpacked. Increase the default
load address so that we can load a 4MB kernel image without any
problems.
Signed-off-by: Haavard
On Jan 23, 2008 6:16 PM, Jon Loeliger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Tales Toledo wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I saw a previous discussion but I think main reason why 1.3.1 doesn't
> > compile is different from mentioned there.
> > I had the same error trying to compile to EP88x with eldk 3.1 toolchains.
Hi,
I'm working on a amcc taishan board.
The board works find with for u-boot 1.1.3 and 1.1.6.
I'm using montavista ppc_440-gcc build tools.
But any version after 1.2.0 compilation fails at start.S
apparently it complains about an Unrecognized opcode 'rfmci (message show below)
Questions:
1)
Becky Bruce wrote:
> This patchset adds support for the new law setup method in
> fsl_law.c to 86xx. The existing platforms (mpc8641hpcn,
> mpc8610hpcd, and sbc8641d) are converted to use the new
> method. The old support is them removed.
>
> A print_laws() function is then added to fsl_law.c
Peter Pearse wrote:
> Dirk, Alex
> Did this get tested?
I looked again into it. As I now have real hardware, I can test it.
> If so did it pass?
Yes. At least for me ;) I tested with (x) >> 1 (division by 2, didn't
want to wait ~42 minutes) and the wrap around time was doubled.
>
Andy Fleming wrote:
> On Jan 24, 2008 10:33 AM, Peter Pearse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_MPC834X) || \
>> + defined(CONFIG_MPC8313) || \
>> + defined(CONFIG_MPC8315) || \
>> + defined(CONFIG_MPC837X)
>> #include
>> +#endif
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_HARD_SPI
Llandre
Your patch is available for test from
git://linux-arm.org/u-boot-armdev.git#071107_mem
However, would it be possible to re-factor it to remove the parts which
apply only to linux
e.g include/linux/linkage.h etc.
And it would be interesting to have some measurements of how much
Ladislav
Your patch is available for test from
git://linux-arm.org/u-boot-armdev.git#070524_netstar
Please confirm that the code runs on netstar
Sorry for the delay, I hope to get this patch into the next merge window.
Regards
Peter
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:23:52 +0900
Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In current source code, when the device number of PCI is 0, process PCI
> bridge without fail. However, when the device number is 0, it is not PCI
> always bridge. There are times when device of PCI allocates.
>
> W
Martin
Your patches (slightly amended as per Wolfgangs comments) are
available for test from
git://linux-arm.org/u-boot-armdev.git#S3C2410
Please confirm that the code runs on whatever S3C boards you have
available.
Sorry for the delay, I hope to get this merged in the next window
Reg
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:50:09 -0600
"Andy Fleming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 24, 2008 10:33 AM, Peter Pearse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_MPC834X) || \
> > + defined(CONFIG_MPC8313) || \
> > + defined(CONFIG_MPC8315) || \
> > + defined(CONFIG_MP
On Jan 24, 2008 10:33 AM, Peter Pearse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> +#if defined(CONFIG_MPC834X) || \
> + defined(CONFIG_MPC8313) || \
> + defined(CONFIG_MPC8315) || \
> + defined(CONFIG_MPC837X)
> #include
> +#endif
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_HARD_SPI
> ---
>
> or should asm-ppc/mpc8
is only available for ppc boards.
Patch against
git://www.denx.de/git/u-boot.git
commit 33dac03b1b5d61e4fed7bad445ba40b4c97feba0
Signed-off-by: Peter Pearse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
diff -purN u-boot_unpatched/drivers/spi/mpc8xxx_spi.c
u-boot/drivers/spi/mpc8xxx_spi.c
--- u-boot_unpatched/dri
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008, Peter Pearse wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> > Of Johannes Stezenbach
> > Sent: 25 October 2007 17:11
> >
> > I wanted to build u-boot-1.3.0-rc3 for the KwikByte KB9202
> > board with the current AR
Hugging My Pillow http://117.195.0.228/
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
http://www.eyagioah.com/
Do you really know what a girl wants?
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
__
Hi,
I want to change one register inside the LXT971A:
set 0 the parameter PHY_LXT971_DIG_CFG_MII_DRIVE for the register
PHY_LXT971_TX_CTRL, this register is define in the file include/lxt971a.h , so
I think that I have need to change the file cpu/at91rm9200/lxt972.c . I call
the function
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> Could you please tell me whether U-Boot support remote debugging through
> Ethernet ?
What do you want to debug? U-Boot itself? Then use a BDI3000 over
ethernet. Linux? Use a BDI3000.
> Is there any supporting files for Ethernet and Serial I/O wit
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> > I think you are doing something wrong when you try to use "eeprom" to
> > access "SPI flash" - these are differnt entities...
>
> let's make sure we're talking about the same thing. SPI flashes are eeproms
> that have a SPI interface. so Spansion
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> > drivers added for generic SPI support. My preference would be for you
> > to expand the 'spi' command with something like:
> >
> > 'spi eeprom info'
>
> i dont see how in the long run, this is any different from today. Wolfgang
> can still argue th
Hi all,
Could you please tell me whether U-Boot support remote debugging through
Ethernet ?
Is there any supporting files for Ethernet and Serial I/O with
U-Boot?
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challeng
tangwei hotmail.com> writes:
> dear ,all
Hi Tangwei
> I have a board use S3C2442B43 (400MHz, 64MB mSDRAM, 128MB Nand), and there is
> no flash or other memory,so have to use the nand boot, is there someone have
> done something for this, please give me some advices, thanks.
Booting from NAND fl
On Wednesday 23 January 2008, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > with eeprom_info behind CONFIG_SPI. most SPI flashes nowadays support
> > the jedec id command which allows for dynamic detection (which is how the
> > Blackfin SPI driver that i wrote works). hook
Hi Bruce
> I am having trouble compiling a build for u-boot 1.1.6. I have a
> microblaze processor. I know that I am just missing a step but I am new
> to using u-boot and need some help.
> I have done a "make suzaku_config"
> When I compile the code I get the error "#error Unknown CPU type".
48 matches
Mail list logo
