> > Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > > Well, the "version 2" prefix is kind of already taken by
> > > Sascha Hauers alternative implementation.
> > >
> > > Should we go for 2.x.x anyway?
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 11:47:22AM -0500, Ken Fuchs wrote:
> > May I suggest CC.YY.MM?
> >
> > VERSION =
> > PA
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Well, the "version 2" prefix is kind of already taken by Sascha Hauers
> alternative implementation.
>
> Should we go for 2.x.x anyway?
May I suggest CC.YY.MM?
VERSION =
PATCHLEVEL =
SUBLEVEL =
EXTRAVERSION = or
So this month's release number would become 20.08.08.
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > U-Boot already has too many
> > preprocessor constants and the addition of another (perhaps)
> > dubious one merits more debate.
You omitted the context of this statement and hence most of its meaning.
Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> I don't completely agree. U-Bo
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > /* choose RMII or MII mode. This depends on the board */
> > #ifdef CONFIG_RMII
> > #if defined(CONFIG_AT91CAP9) || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9260) || \
> > -defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9263)
> > +defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9263) || defined(CONFIG_AT91S
No HTML allowed on this list; Please use plain text messages.
Light King (Ansh) wrote:
> I am working on AT91SAM9263 Customised board having U-boot.
> I want to run some application on the top of U-boot . I found
> some command like go to run a application in U-boot. I m
> trying to run the demo
Please do not use HTML on this mailing list. All
messages to this list must be in plain text.
Mondesir, Alshine wrote:
> My latest endeavor has me cross compiling a stand
> alone application for > MPC8548 PPC for a U-Boot
> Based target. There is no Operating System to
> run on the target to sp
Please stop sending HMTL encoded messages to the list.
Please use plain text. (Using plain text is a requirement
for using this mailing list.)
vijays vijays wrote:
> I have updated the my configuration for the CONFIG_ETHADDR and
> CONFIG_IPADDR
> But still getting same "TX timeout" error. from
> Ken Fuchs wrote:
> > There are at least two problems with your U-Boot 1.1.3
> > configuration:
> > vijays vijays wrote:
> > > #define CONFIG_ETHADDROO:11:22:33:44:55
> > > /* board MAC addr */
> > The first byte "OO" is two capital Os; perhaps "00" was the intended
> > first byte
vijay vijay wrote:
> I am using Denx u-boot 1.1.3 for MPC 870 board.
> I ported it for our board with mpc870 processor and I got the
> u-boot (->) prompt.
> UART interface is working fine but Ethernet interface (motfec)
> is not up yet.
ub> ping 10.10.10.4
> TX timeout
> TX timeout
> ping faile
Naveen Kumar GADDIPATI wrote:
> I'm working for non-contiguous clusters support for MMC in
> u-boot 1.3.1 source code for flashing the linux images.
> We have a u-boot,which is working for contiguous clusters in MMC.
What do mean by clusters in MMC? MMC deals with raw blocks.
> Anybody could c
> On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 16:21:59 -0500
> Ken.Fuchs wrote:
>
> > The U-Boot AT91 MCI driver is no longer the exclusive work
> > of Atmel. So, I do not believe that a sole Atmel copyright
> > is correct for the AT91 MCI driver.
> >
> > I added MMC 4.x supp
> >> Vyas Ashish wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Group,
> >>>
> >>> I have a at91sam9261ek evaluation Kit from Atmel and I
> >>> want to bring
> >>> up the UBoot on that. When I got the board, I also got
> >>> UBoot binary
> >>> which can be flashed and verified. However, I did not get
> >>> the source
> Signed-off-by: Antonio R. Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> diff --git a/board/atmel/at572d940hfeb/atmel_mci.c
> b/board/atmel/at572d940hfeb/atmel_mci.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000..065a85b
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/board/atmel/at572d940hfeb/atmel_mci.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,869 @@
> +/*
> + * (C)
Victor (pfc) wrote:
> I've been working last months on a lubbock board
> and u-boot as a bootloader to run Linux. I always
> loaded my kernel via serial port, because I never
> got u-boot to activate my ethernet (I never got the
> link led on, only after booting Linux).
> I recently read the FAQ
With Linux running on your system (or booted via a Live CD like
Knoppix):
# lspci -vvv
That should reveal most of the major chips
Device manager on MS Windows may provide similar information.
You may have to physically identify on the smaller chips on the
board, since they will not be visible i
Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> Remove #ifdef CONFIG_MMC from the source file and use conditional
> compilation in the Makefile instead.
What's wrong with the current code? Why are you doing this?
> Signed-off-by: Haavard Skinnemoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> cpu/at32ap/Makefile|2 +-
>
Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> The warnings are harmless but annoying. Let's fix them.
If the warnings are "harmless", why are you "fixing them"?
The compiler has switches to turn off warnings, if they
annoy you too much.
Does this refactoring of the code do something more than
just avoid a warnin
> In u-boot under common/cmd_usb.c there are commands for
> usb info , usb tree, usb reset,
>
> I can find usb read command also
>
> There is no command for usb write
Since a bootloader loads things from boot devices as opposed
writing things to boot devices, it makes sense that
Stelian Pop's patch:
> diff --git a/include/configs/at91cap9adk.h
> -#define AT91_SPI_CLK 2000
> -#define DATAFLASH_TCSS (0xFA << 16)
> -#define DATAFLASH_TCHS (0x8 << 24)
> +#define AT91_SPI_CLK 1500
> +#define
Pierre Savary wrote:
> Thanks a lot for your patch. I will test it next week.
I found it useful to modify common/cmd_mmc.c drastically
to facilitate easier testing of the AT91SAM9 MCI driver.
It replaces mmcinit with "mmc init" and adds raw read
("mmc read") and write ("mmc write") functions.
To
Pierre Savary wrote:
> Thanks a lot for your patch. I will test it next week.
Sorry, that patch was manually constructed. I forgot about
include/asm-arm/arch-at91sam926x/at91sam9261.h which includes
the pin definitions used by the MCI controller. An ancillary
patch for this file is appended be
I posted the following patch under a different subject line:
Re: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] Add eSDHC driver
> > --- u-boot_at91sam9260_mmc.patch (AT91 MCI driver) ---
Pierre Savary wrote:
> Thanks for that... but it's my own patch ;)
>
> Pierre
Andreas Schweigstill wrote:
> On certain platforms (e.g. Atmel AT91) even U-Boot will just
> be used as a second or third level bootloader. The basic CPU
> setup has been done before starting U-Boot.
Qualification: The following is true for all AT91SAM9 processors.
It probably also applies to AT
Adrian Filipi wrote:
> It looks like fat.c is not handling the case where the
> sectors/cluster is 1, and the rood directory spans multiple clusters.
>
> In my case I was getting garbage directory info after
> the invalid fat error. The attached patch stops the code
> from rolling
Michael Trimarchi wrote:
> In my spare time a try to change the do_fat_read to support
> the chaining.
Thank you. Please let me know of anything I can do to help.
Does this mean you are now able to duplicate the problem?
The "Microsoft Extensible Firmware Initiative FAT32 File System
Specific
Michael Trimarchi wrote:
> confirm that the problem is in fat.c file and I will try to fix.
It has been confirmed that fatls does _not_ list
all files on FAT32 filesystems.
There are _no_ reports of fatls failing to list
all files on FAT16 filesystems. (There may be
an unrelated bug caused by a
Thanks for reporting similar problems with U-Boot's FAT32
support.
Adrian Filipi wrote:
> It seems to be a FAT32 problem with media 256MB and smaller.
Thanks for this observation, but this may not be entirely true.
With larger FAT32 filesystems it seems to require more files
in the root director
USB_STOR_DEBUG log:
Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0
U-Boot> usb reset
usb reset
(Re)start USB...
USB: scanning bus for devices...
USB device not responding, giving up (status=20)
3 USB Device(s) found
scanning bus for storage devices... i=0
i=1
USB Mass Storage device detected
Tr
My include/fat.h is identical to the fat.h in both
git repository u-boot and git repository u-boot-at91,
except that I put the CHECKCLUST() macro in fat.c
rather than fat.h.
Ken
> -Original Message-
> From: michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 03:00
> To: Fu
Michael,
I copied all files in fs/fat from git repository u-boot-at91. Made trivial
changes to compile it with my code base. Added your latest get_vfatname patch,
but it had no effect on the issue. fatls still
doesn't list filenames in some FAT32 filesystems, including the one
built via the L
> Pierre Savary wrote:
> >Where could we find the driver that works with MMCv4 on at91sam9x?
Andy Fleming wrote:
> Pierre, I don't have a driver that works on at91sam9x, I'm
> afraid.
Here's an MMC v2.x AT91SAM9260 patch for Atmel modified u-boot 1.1.5.
You will need to define GPIO pins for ot
Michael,
Sorry, your latest get_vfatname patch doesn't work either.
FAT16 works perfectly, so the USB code is probably _not_ at fault. I see only
problems with FAT32, but only for _some_ long collections of files.
Thus, there may still be a problem with fs/fat/fat.c. Maybe there is something
--- Introduction ---
This thread concerns possible problems with fs/fat/fat.c
(incorrect fatls output and inaccessible files via
fatload) even when recent "git" patches have been applied
to fat.c. VFAT is enabled.
Michael Trimarchi wrote:
> Can you give an image of it?
(He is referring to the
micheal wrote:
> Ken Fuchs wrote:
> > #define CONFIG_SUPPORT_VFAT
> >
> > --- FAT16 vs. FAT32 - Atmel U-Boot v1.1.5 issue? ---
> >
> > I have found that the USB support is better
> > when the USB Storage device is FAT16 formatted
> > rather than FAT32 formatted. For some reason
> > not all files
Aneesh wrote:
> I am using an at91rm9200dk custom board.
> I want to boot kernel and ram disk from the
> usb stick.for that i tried to enable the usb
> support in the uboot. but now i am getting a
> message like no storage devices found .
Someone else has already suggested using a current
U-B
On Thursday, February 07, 2008 09:59, Stefan Roese wrote:
> I'm wondering what may be needed to boot WinCE (6.0) images
> from U-Boot.
> Searching the web leads to some pages that mention booting
> WinCE is possible.
> But my understanding is that some additional patches are
> necessary and t
Goal:
U-Boot will run only software that has been
authenticated to be from the system's producer.
--- A Potential Authentication Method ---
The producer of the system generates a cryptographic
[private-key, public-key] pair, storing the public-key
on the same media as U-Boot (i.e. NOR flash; p
Plamen Panteleev wrote:
> Can I install U-Boot over redboot for booting Windows CE
Simply installing U-Boot over RedBoot will result
in a system that comes up with U-Boot running, but
(probably) _can't_ boot CE!
Usually MS Windows CE is booted by Eboot which is built
with the CE kernel NK.bin (a
Congratulations! It will be great to have MMC v4.x support in U-Boot.
The following segment of code from
linux-2.6.25-rc9/drivers/mmc/host/at91_mci.c is confusing:
if (host->board->wire4) {
if (cpu_is_at91sam9260() || cpu_is_at91sam9263())
mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_4_BIT_DATA;
Pierre Savary wrote:
> Then my MMC 4GB works with my Linux kernel but if I can't
> load my kernel
> (located on the first part of this MMC) ... it's not really
> interesting :(
> So, somebody does already use MMC v4 with U-boot???
Assuming a AT91SAM926x MCI controller:
Probably. Given an MMC
$ strace git clone http://git.denx.de/u-boot-at91.git
Here is strace output of one iteration of the infinite loop.
90 3571246 [main] git-http-fetch 2780 cygwin_select: 6, 0x22C550,
0x22C530, 0x22C510, 0x22C5B0
42 3571288 [main] git-http-fetch 2780 dtable::select_write: fd 5
20 3571308 [
$ git clone http://git.denx.de/u-boot-at91.git
Initialized empty Git repository in
/cygdrive/n/ken/U-Boot/git/u-boot-at91/.git/
Getting alternates list for http://git.denx.de/u-boot-at91.git
Also look at http://git.denx.de/git/u-boot.git/
Getting pack list for http://git.denx.de/u-boot-at91.git
Get
$ git clone http://git.denx.de/u-boot-at91.git
Initialized empty Git repository in
/cygdrive/n/ken/U-Boot/git/u-boot-at91/.git/
Getting alternates list for http://git.denx.de/u-boot-at91.git
Also look at http://git.denx.de/git/u-boot.git/
Getting pack list for http://git.denx.de/u-boot-at91.git
Get
Pierre Ossman wrote:
> Ken Fuchs wrote:
>
> > The MCI controller on the AT91SAM926x family does not support
> > MMCplus. There is no way to support a 4 bit bus, since the
> > MCI controller supports only 1 bit to an MMC chip.
>
> Untrue. The hardware interface is identical for 4-bit SD and
> 4
Pierre Savary wrote:
> I use a MMCplus 4GB on my design (with at91sam9260). It's
> wired with 4 bits.
The MCI controller on the AT91SAM926x family does not support
MMCplus. There is no way to support a 4 bit bus, since the
MCI controller supports only 1 bit to an MMC chip. The MCI will
support
> "U-Boot > ext2load mmc 0:1 2150 vmImage"
> Next, many "." appear on the console while the image is not
> totally load on the SDRam. I don't want print this dot. So
> how can I disable this?
The mmc_bread() routine in ./cpu/*/*/atmel_mci.c contains
putc('.');
You probably want to comment
Are there plans to add AT91SAM926x-EK board support to the main U-Boot
repository or an appropriate custodian repository?
If so, what is the anticipated time frame of this support?
--
In the official U-Boot 1.3.1 release, I wasn't able to locate any boards
with an AT91SAM926x processor. Are
Ulf Samuelson wrote:
> There are no Atmel AT91SAM9 dev boards which uses a parallel flash.
This is not quite true. I'm able to boot a AT91SAM9263-EK board via EBI
NOR flash and an AT91Bootstrap/Atmel modified U-Boot right now. Did I
misunderstand your statement above?
One needs only to solder
48 matches
Mail list logo
