Hi Hong Xu,
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 1:05 AM, Hong Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >From 81230b02610c06fdc8a175e635851346488e3bdb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Hong Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 14:25:05 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH 1/1] Add support for ATMEL AT91SAM9G20EK board
>
>
Hi :)
regarding ppc boards,oh, i didn't know that
actually i'm a 22yo newbie guy which is interested in u-boot
because i do study information systems in Brazil and i'm doing a
linux distro for thin clients(as a final course project->monograph+software)
and i got interested in u-boot because it see
Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/serial/usbtty.c | 10 +-
drivers/serial/usbtty.h |7 ++-
drivers/usb/usbdcore_omap1510.c | 16
include/usbdcore_omap1510.h |6 +++---
4 files changed, 26 ins
Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:29:35 -0700
> "J. William Campbell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 22:51:09 +0200
>>> kenneth johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
Can't see any reason for using this
Add support to drivers/usb/usbdcore_omap1510.c for OMAP5912 and OMAP16xx
devices.
Signed-off-by: Jon Hunter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/usb/usbdcore_omap1510.c | 27 ---
1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/usbdcore_omap1510.c
>> Due to the fact thath the documentation is under NDA and you have access
>> to it. Could you send a patch for it?
No problem. I will have a crack. Please note long-time user, first time
patcher, so let me know if anything gets messed up but I have tried to follow
the guidelines that you have.
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:29:35 -0700
"J. William Campbell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 22:51:09 +0200
> > kenneth johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Can't see any reason for using this flag over -fPIC for a program like
> >> u-boot.
> >>
Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 22:51:09 +0200
> kenneth johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>> Hmm...looks like linking with -pie (or --pic-executable) does
>>> something vaguely resembling the trick. But I don't know what vintage
>>> of ld you need for this to be availabl
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> sudo tar xjvf u-boot-1.3.3.tar.bz2 -C /usr/src
>
> then i tried:
>
> make distclean canyonlands_config all
> (as i read at http://www.denx.de/wiki/view/DULG/UBootConfiguration )
You mention "u-boot on x86" in the subjct - are you aware that the
Canyo
Hi Geraldo,
On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Geraldo Netto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Albert,
> Thank you very much for your support/help :)
> i actually didn't want be harsh with my words :(
> i'm pretty newbie, *really*
I haven't tried to build U-boot for x86 target, but am led to believ
Hi Albert,
Thank you very much for your support/help :)
i actually didn't want be harsh with my words :(
i'm pretty newbie, *really*
and what i did is:
sudo tar xjvf u-boot-1.3.3.tar.bz2 -C /usr/src
then i tried:
make distclean canyonlands_config all
(as i read at http://www.denx.de/wiki/view/D
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 17:44:52 -0500
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But since we already have a CONFIG_AVR32 #define, we can clean
> > up the mess in macb.c by simply reversing the logic.
>
> If CONFIG_AVR32 can be used in macb.c without ofuscation, why is
> CONFIG_AT91 needed here? However, "si
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 07:36:35 +0200
Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> n message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> >
> > Ok, I'll stop the chest-beating now. But please stop trying to tell
> > people that adding a powerpc-specific option (which nobody seems to
> > know how really works) to t
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 22:51:09 +0200
kenneth johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hmm...looks like linking with -pie (or --pic-executable) does
> > something vaguely resembling the trick. But I don't know what vintage
> > of ld you need for this to be available and actually work...
>
> Can't
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
> Sent: den 26 juli 2008 16:03
> To: Grant Likely
> Cc: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net; Wolfgang Denk; vb; Jerry Van Baren;
> Haavard Skinnemoen
> Subject: Re: [U-Bo
On 01:57 Sat 26 Jul , Grant Likely wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 1:28 PM, kenneth johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I was afraid that what was needed was more or less a complete linker but
> > it looks like if one generate the dynamic reloc table a much simpler
> > linker(relocation f
On 16:46 Fri 25 Jul , Hunter, Jon wrote:
> Hello!
>
> > > I am working on getting USB-uboot working on OSK5912.
> > > from linux USB gadget "device controller drivers" (i.e.
> > > kernel/drivers/usb/gadget/) it looks like
> > > USB core for omap1510 and OSK5912 is same..But not sure, please co
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> I m new to U-Boot . Plz dont neglect me may be this a sily question but I
Do not top post.
Do not full quote.
Do not hijack an unrelated subject.
Use a descriptive subject.
Do not post HTML.
In other words: make sure to read
http://catb.org/esr/
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> > Or why?
>
> If it turns out that is is not that complicated all architectures could
> do it in the same way.
That would require that all architectures implementrelocation in the
same way (or at all). Actually this is not the case.
Best regards,
W
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> You are completely right. For the purposes of this discussion, this
> is a powerpc-centric problem. The relocation code is written in
> assembly and is processor specific. Let the ARM folks make sure ARM
> relocation works (and I think it already do
On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 3:53 AM, kenneth johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-07-26 at 01:48 -0400, Grant Likely wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 2:09 PM, Kenneth Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Thu, 2008-07-24 at 10:37 -0700, vb wrote:
>> >> But as you pointed out, thi
> >
>
> As I see it, CONFIG_AT91 would mean that you have a
> a certain class of peripherals which is developed for the
> AT91 range of processors (and is used by the AVR32 as well)
> The name is probably slightly misleading, but convenient.
>
> Not having this definition, will soon mean that
Geraldo Netto a écrit :
> i tried the steps at http://www.denx.de/wiki/DULG/Manual
> but i was not able to make it work on x86
> does anyone have any tip/doc(s) on how to make u-boot work on x86?
> i'd really appreciate that help :P
Hello,
You *might* get some help if you specify what exactly yo
Dear All,
I m new to U-Boot . Plz dont neglect me may be this a sily question but I
want to know is U-Boot is using directly physical address or virtual address
of a processor .
plz reply this question .
On 7/26/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Send U-Boot-Users mailing lis
for, if
M
> Hello Michal
>
> No hints about where are this codyng style issues?
>
> Best regards
>
>
>
>
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest L
On Sat, 2008-07-26 at 01:48 -0400, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 2:09 PM, Kenneth Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-07-24 at 10:37 -0700, vb wrote:
> >> But as you pointed out, this would work on ppc only (with a 'good'
> >> compiler), and still remains to be pro
On Sat, 2008-07-26 at 07:36 +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> >
> > I know exactly what Grant did. But he is not using the elf relocation
> > information as that is simply not included in the data that is the
> > u-boot.bin file.
>
> So what? Is this a prob
27 matches
Mail list logo
