[U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] Move conditional compilation of MPC8XXX SPI driver to Makefile

Signed-off-by: Ben Warren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- drivers/spi/Makefile |2 +- drivers/spi/mpc8xxx_spi.c |2 -- 2 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/spi/Makefile b/drivers/spi/Makefile index bc8a104..eab9d93 100644 --- a/drivers/spi/Makefile +++ b/driv

Re: [U-Boot-Users] [MIPS] CPU-dependent compiler/assembler options for optimization

Dear Shinya, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > > > There are still people out there who use ancient toolchains like > > gcc-2.95. Do we really have to break compatibility here? > > This patch adds, > - support more CPU variants other than MIPS 4K > - without changing the code. >

Re: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] Setting processor endianess for USB modules

Hello all, > > > Please fix your mailer (or even better use git-send-email) > > > > Unfortunately I don't have this command (perhaps my git is too old). > > No, that's not the reason. Your mail says: > > > -- > > 1.4.3.4 > > but git-send-email was already present under this name in v0.99.7. >

Re: [U-Boot-Users] Command table relocation

Hi Nanda, the command table is (essentially) a vector of pointers to functions (the commands). These pointers are calculated using the TEXTBASE pointer that usually is located into the flash. When relocate the u-boot code, we need to update the commands table with the relocated pointer for e each

Re: [U-Boot-Users] [MIPS] CPU-dependent compiler/assembler options for optimization

Wolfgang Denk wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: >> We take the same options as Linux for now. This means that an ancient >> -mcpu support will be lost. Users need gcc 3.0.X or later. > > Why is this change necessary? Not necessary. > There are still people out there who use a

Re: [U-Boot-Users] [MIPS] Convert CPU type name into CONFIG_CPU_*

Wolfgang Denk wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: >> Adjust to the current Linux way. >> >> Signed-off-by: Shinya Kuribayashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > ... >> -#define CONFIG_MIPS32 1 /* MIPS32 CPU core */ >> +#define CONFIG_CPU_MIPS32_R11 /* MIPS32 CPU core *

Re: [U-Boot-Users] [MIPS] Convert CPU type name into CONFIG_CPU_*

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > Wolfgang Denk wrote: > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > >> Adjust to the current Linux way. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Shinya Kuribayashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > ... > >> -#define CONFIG_MIPS32 1 /* MIPS32 CPU core */ > >> +#defi

Re: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 3/3][MIPS] lib_mips/time.c: Fix improper use of CFG_HZ and timer routines

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > > My udelay is already global-variable-free. And as for cycles_per_jiffy > and expirelo, we could make it work like this: ... > -static unsigned int expirelo; > +static unsigned long cycles_per_jiffy = (CONFIG_MIPS_TIMER_FREQ + CFG_HZ / > 2) / CFG_HZ; I

Re: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 2/2][MIPS] Add cpu_probe and cpu_report

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > > > Ummm... we're adding more than 750 lines of code - for which benefit > > exactly? > > This patch is still in development, and just probes info at the moment. > We will utilize it around TLB initialization, cache unrolling, .etc. But > that's not yet

Re: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 2/2][MIPS] Add cpu_probe and cpu_report

Wolfgang Denk wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: >> Probe CPU information (core type, ISA level, core features and TLB size). >> These info will be utilized all over the further processing. > ... >> cpu/mips/cpu-probe.c | 754 >> ++

Re: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 3/3][MIPS] lib_mips/time.c: Fix improper use of CFG_HZ and timer routines

Wolfgang Denk wrote: >> Sure. We'll probably need to move timer_init to board_init_r at the end. > > I'm not sure if this works. We use udelay() and friends all over the > place - a long time before that. Hmm. My udelay is already global-variable-free. And as for cycles_per_jiffy and expirelo, w

[U-Boot-Users] Command table relocation

Hi All, In u-boot code (in board.c file) there is a comment which goes like this: /* * We have to relocate the command table manually */ Why we need to relocate the code for command table separately? Does command table code not linked with rest of the code? And where is t

Re: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 3/3][MIPS] lib_mips/time.c: Fix improper use of CFG_HZ and timer routines

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > Wolfgang Denk wrote: > > Be careful - keep in mind that variables in the data segment will be > > read-only before relocation to RAM, and variables in BSS will be > > uninitialized *and* get overwritten with zero when the BSS gets > > initiali