Andrew E. Mileski wrote:
> Norbert van Bolhuis wrote:
>> Nowadays, do many (PowerPC) embedded devices already risk omitting
>> NOR flash and use a NAND device solely for booting and storing images ?
>>
>> I'm talking about systems with 10 years life-cycle (so no
>> MP3-players nor medical systems b
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Kyungmin Park,
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>> Since page size field is changed from oobblock to writesize. But OneNAND is
>> not updated.
>> - fix bufferram management at erase operation
>> This patch includes the NAND/OneNAND state filed too.
>>
>> g
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 09:11:02AM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
> Since page size field is changed from oobblock to writesize. But OneNAND is
> not updated.
> - fix bufferram management at erase operation
> This patch includes the NAND/OneNAND state filed too.
Applied to nand-flash, with some chan
The following changes since commit 81c4dc39797e88ebbde14bb4b711f9588f197680:
Stefan Roese (1):
Merge branch 'master' of /home/stefan/git/u-boot/u-boot
are available in the git repository at:
git://www.denx.de/git/u-boot-nand-flash.git master
Steve Sakoman (1):
OneNAND: Remove u
On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 09:42:27PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> + if (ctrl & NAND_CTRL_CHANGE) {
> + if (ctrl & NAND_CLE)
> + this->IO_ADDR_W = (void __iomem *)NFCMMD;
> + else if (ctrl & NAND_ALE)
> + this->IO_ADDR_W = (v
Hong Xu wrote:
> I noticed that you are now maintaining a custodian tree which is
> focused on NAND support in u-boot. Could you please tell me is there
> any schedule or plan to publish your "testing" tree?
> Thanks.
I hope to merge it during the next merge window.
-Scott
--
On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 09:42:07PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> block = offs / CFG_NAND_BLOCK_SIZE;
> + blocks = (uboot_size + offs - ((block - 1) * CFG_NAND_BLOCK_SIZE) - 1) /
> + CFG_NAND_BLOCK_SIZE;
> blockcopy_count = 0;
>
> - while (blockcopy_count <
On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 04:42:51PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> >
> > > Oops? This is expected and normal behaviour. Did anybody complain
> > > about this?
It's hit me before when I foolishly try to load something at address
zero -- why do we put u-boo
On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 11:47:22AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 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 =
Fathi BOUDRA wrote:
>> Why not just declare a static array?
>
> I tried with a static array but it doesn't give the expected result (a quick
> test with onenand info command returns an empty mtd name), so I used a
> pointer.
Odd... Maybe a relocation issue?
>> It'd be better to use snprintf, e
On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 10:06:20AM +0200, Fathi BOUDRA wrote:
> -void onenand_print_device_info(int device, int verbose)
> +char * onenand_print_device_info(int device)
No space after unary '*' (here and elsewhere).
> {
> int vcc, demuxed, ddp, density;
> -
> - if (!verbose)
> -
Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
>> /* Begin command latch cycle */
>> -this->cmd_ctrl(mtd, cmd, ctrl);
>> +this->cmd_ctrl(mtd, cmd, NAND_CTRL_CLE | NAND_CTRL_CHANGE);
>
> [snip]
>
> See? you do the same! You replace short lowercase variable with long
> uppercase macros:-)
:-)
Yes, b
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 11:06:28AM +0200, Fathi BOUDRA wrote:
> -void onenand_print_device_info(int device, int verbose)
> +char * onenand_print_device_info(int device)
> {
> int vcc, demuxed, ddp, density;
> -
> - if (!verbose)
> - return;
> + char *dev_info;
>
>
Also, remove the ctrl variable in favor of passing the constants
directly, and remove redundant (u8) casts.
Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
This patch is untested, as I don't have the hardware.
Applied to u-boot-nand-flash/testing.
nand_spl/nand_bo
Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Aug 2008, Scott Wood wrote:
>> Are you saying that your NAND chip can't read the OOB by issuing READ0
>> with the appropriate column address? Which chip is this, and where can I
>> find a manual?
>
> At least, this is how I
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 03:36:43PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> /*
> - * offs has to be aligned to a block address!
> + * offs has to be aligned to a page address!
>*/
> block = offs / CFG_NAND_BLOCK_SIZE;
> + /* Recalculate offs as an offset inside a bloc
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 03:36:33PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> Version 5: This time based on nand-flash/testing head. Therefore it
> couldn't be runtime-tested: largepage support in nand_spl is broken there
> ATM.
Hmm, so it is. I don't have hardware that uses the cmd_ctrl interface t
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 03:08:04PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> It's a large-page device. And, as far as I understand the datasheet, to
> read data at arbitrary offset in a page, you first have to issue a READ
> PAGE (READ0) for _the_ _whole_ page, then you can use RANDOM DATA READ to
>
which current
revisions have). If you have such a board, please let me know if it
works after a warm reset.
Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Applied to u-boot-nand-flash/testing.
Makefile| 10 ++-
board/freescale/mpc8313erd
Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Applied to u-boot-nand-flash/testing.
include/configs/MPC8313ERDB.h |2 ++
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/configs/MPC8313ERDB.h b/include/configs/MPC8313ERDB.h
index d547681..3a644d3 100644
On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 02:46:15PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_NAND_SPL
> +static u_char nand_read_byte(struct mtd_info *mtd)
> +{
> + struct nand_chip *this = mtd->priv;
> + return readb(this->IO_ADDR_R);
> +}
> +
> +static void nand_write_byte(struct mtd_info *mtd
On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 02:45:33PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> I _think_ this should work with all NAND chips. Otherwise we might have to
> introduce a configuration variable.
Which small-page NAND chips can't handle READOOB? On large page devices,
nand_command changes it to READ0.
Th
Kumar Gala wrote:
> On Aug 4, 2008, at 3:55 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> Why not? Wouldn't it be just another environment variable, like the
>> load address for the kernel?
>
> Right now the fdt is placed at the first 4k page after the kernel is
> decompressed. I do
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 12:42:43PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c | 33 +
> 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/n
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 12:38:26PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> Environment can be smaller than NAND block size, do not need to read a whole
> block and minimum for writing is one page. Also remove an unused variable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Applied t
Kumar Gala wrote:
> On Aug 4, 2008, at 3:27 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>> So just run the needed commands before you run "bootm" as part of your
>> boot command sequence.
>
> This doesnt work. Lets say I want to remove a node or property that
> ft_board_setup() adds. If I do what you are suggest
Scott Wood wrote:
> Jatin Sharma wrote:
>> I have Freescale MPC8347. Can you confirm that I have to have U-Boot
>> start at 0xFFF0?
>
> Your choices are 0xfff0 and zero, based on the BMS (Boot Memory
> Space) bit of the low reset control word.
Grr, that should
Jatin Sharma wrote:
> I have Freescale MPC8347. Can you confirm that I have to have U-Boot
> start at 0xFFF0?
Your choices are 0xfff0 and zero, based on the BMS (Boot Memory
Space) bit of the low reset control word.
-Scott
Jatin Sharma wrote:
> After I posted this message, I learned the reset vector for the PPC
> architecture lies at 0xFFF00100.
Well, it depends on what kind of PPC chip...
> Does it mean the u-boot has to start
> at the address 0xFFF0?
Yes (or possibly zero, if the RCW is set appropriately).
On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 12:16:13PM -0500, Jatin Sharma wrote:
> I have to increase u-boot's partition size on my board to make room
> for an application to be compiled as part of u-boot binary. I am
> currently running u-boot version "1.3.1-rc1" and my current NOR
> partition is as follows:
>
> Pa
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 04:30:06PM +0200, Marcel Ziswiler wrote:
> Fixes an issue with chip->state not always being set causing troubles.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marcel Ziswiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c |4
> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 12:01:18PM +0100, Nigel Hathaway wrote:
> I have been playing around with a board from Olimex: the SAM9-L9260 (it
> has an Atmel AT91SAM9260 on it). This has a ROMboot with U-Boot in NAND
> flash. The board I am using has an interesting feature: the block which
> U-Boot is c
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 09:20:39AM +0200, Fathi BOUDRA wrote:
> TODO: Use NAND command interface (e.g.: part_validate_*nand()).
Do you mean merging the NAND and OneNAND versions of the jffs2 code,
through the (mostly already existing) function pointer interface?
I'd really like to see that done
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 02:31:07PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> /* 2 Gigabit */
> - {"NAND 256MiB 1,8V 8-bit", 0xAA, 0, 256, 0,
> NAND_SAMSUNG_LP_OPTIONS | NAND_NO_AUTOINCR},
> - {"NAND 256MiB 3,3V 8-bit", 0xDA, 0, 256, 0,
> NAND_SAMSUNG_LP_OPTIONS | NAND_NO_AUTOI
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>> Aligning with TABs (or at all, in initializer lists) is not a good thing,
>
> It is mandatory per Coding Style requirements.
Where? I don't see any mention of alignment, and while there's no
explicit definition of indentation,
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 04:48:51PM +0800, Ryan CHEN wrote:
> Description:
> The patch updates /fs/ext2/ext2fs.c file. There are two aims:
> 1. Make U-Boot could support the EXT2 dynamic version that ext2_inode_size
> beyond 128bytes.
> One new feature be involved: CFG_EXT2_SUPPORT_DYNAMIC_REV
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 09:52:12AM +0100, Mark Jackson wrote:
> I didn't want to use u-boot's "slient boot" options, since they're
> hard-coded at compile time. The only place I could think to this was to
> modify the atmel_usart.c file as above.
It's not hard-coded at compile-time -- set GD_FL
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 04:37:35PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > This board seems to be using the legacy NAND interface, but doesn't
> > define CFG_NAND_LEGACY. It also doesn't define CONFIG_CMD_NAND; if one
> > does so, then it gets build errors (with
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 09:22:24AM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 6:21 AM, Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 04:23:34PM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
> >> Use the common declaration in NAND/OneNAND state
&
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 10:03:43PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
wrote:
>
> +
> > +static const struct sdram_config sdram_config = {
> > +.data_bits= SDRAM_DATA_16BIT,
> > +.row_bits= 13,
> > +.col_bits= 9,
> > +.bank_bits= 2,
> > +.cas= 3,
>
Can someone with the appropriate access run git-update-server-info on
u-boot-nand-flash.git? Currently, it is impossible to clone this
repository via HTTP.
Ideally, this should run via a post-receive hook...
-Scott
-
This S
Kumar Gala wrote:
> On Jul 28, 2008, at 12:40 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
>> In principle I like the idea of having configuration retrieved from
>> the device tree blob, but the idea of reflashing the blob in the
>> context of u-boot scares me. In particular, if u-boot depends too
>> much on the pres
Ben Warren wrote:
> Uh, yeah. I like the idea of a central repo for hardware info, and
> the device tree concept is good. My point is that the syntax, while
> concise and exact, can be intimidating. Just look at the amount of
> traffic on the mailing lists of people that don't understand what al
Ben Warren wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I find a device tree much easier to figure out than a tangled mess of header
>> files, #defines, and #ifdefs...
>
> In many ways, yes. But are you an average Joe or a Linux k
Ben Warren wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 8:07 AM, Kumar Gala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> One topic that come up during OLS in discussions and u-boot BOF was
>> the idea of driving u-boot configuration from a device tree instead of
>> from "config.h". I was wondering if anyone has actually loo
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 04:23:34PM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
> +/*
> + * Enumeration for NAND/OneNAND flash chip state
> + */
> +enum {
> + FL_READY,
> + FL_READING,
> + FL_WRITING,
> + FL_ERASING,
> + FL_SYNCING,
> + FL_CACHEDPRG,
> + FL_UNLOCKING,
> + FL_LOCKING,
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 04:23:34PM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
> Use the common declaration in NAND/OneNAND state
As previously requested, please base this patch against the testing
branch of the u-boot-nand-flash repository.
-Scott
---
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 01:10:02AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> diff --git a/include/linux/mtd/onenand.h b/include/linux/mtd/onenand.h
> index 4b0c2df..903c3af 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mtd/onenand.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mtd/onenand.h
> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
> /* Note: The header order is imp
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 01:18:31PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> - at91rm9200dk:
> In file included from /home/wd/git/u-boot/work/include/nand.h:32,
>from board.c:48:
> /home/wd/git/u-boot/work/include/linux/mtd/nand.h:82:1: warning:
> "NAND_CTL_SETCLE" redefine
This fixes building out-of-tree.
Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Applied to u-boot-nand-flash.
nand_spl/board/amcc/kilauea/Makefile |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/nand_spl/board/amcc/kilauea/Makefile
b/nand_spl/board/amcc/k
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 12:11:12PM +0530, Vijay Nikam wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I have mpc8313erdb evaluation board ... now I am trying to boot it
> from NAND Flash (32MB Flash) ... I am able to get u-boot prompt ...
> but the linux kernel is not booting and so filesystem is not mounting
> ...
>
>
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 11:22:56AM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
> +static int part_validate_onenand(struct mtdids *id, struct part_info *part)
> +{
> +#if defined(CONFIG_CMD_ONENAND)
> + /* info for OneNAND chips */
> + struct mtd_info *mtd;
> +
> + mtd = &onenand_mtd;
> +
> + if ((u
On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 04:11:29PM +0800, Harald Welte wrote:
> +#if defined(CFG_ENV_OFFSET_OOB)
Can you push this conditional into the Makefile?
> +int do_dynenv(cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char *argv[])
> +{
> + struct mtd_info *mtd = &nand_info[0];
> + int ret, size = 8;
> +
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
Try adding -fno-strict-aliasing
>>> No, we don't want to hush up compiler warnings, we want to fix the
>>> problems instead.
>> It's not silencing a warning (i
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>> Try adding -fno-strict-aliasing
>
> No, we don't want to hush up compiler warnings, we want to fix the
> problems instead.
It's not silencing a warning (if it were, it'd be a -W flag); it's
disabling an incompatible optimization
NAND: Fix warning due to missing env_ptr casts to u_char * in env_nand.c.
Scott Wood (2):
NAND: Rename DEBUG to MTDDEBUG to avoid namespace pollution.
NAND: ifdef-protect most of nand.h when using legacy NAND.
common/env_nand.c |8 ++--
cpu/arm926ejs/davi
Some macros such as NAND_CTL_SETALE conflict between current and legacy
NAND, being defined by the subsystem in the former case and the board
config file in the latter.
Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Applied to u-boot-nand-flash.
include/nand.h |5 -
1 files c
Harald Welte wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 01:47:24PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
>> It works if you allow room for bad blocks within each partition, and treat
>> the environment as its own partition. Current u-boot supports skipping bad
>> blocks within a desginat
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 12:28:12AM +0800, Harald Welte wrote:
> I've first sent this on Feb 17, 2007. Unfortunately no reply was
> received. I think this is a quite useful feature, since a compile time
> offset into the NAND flash for the environment just doesn't work well
> with bad blocks ;)
I
On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 04:04:56PM +0800, Harald Welte wrote:
> - do_nand: ask for confirmation for "nand erase"
This will break any usage in scripts. At least, have an explicit command
such as "nand erase all" that doesn't ask.
> - do_nand: add command "nand createbbt" to erase NAND and create
On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 04:04:20PM +0800, Harald Welte wrote:
> [PATCH] add new NAND_DONT_CRATE_BBT flag
>
> This patch makes creation of the BBT optional.
>
> It adds a new platform-independent NAND-wide flag NAND_DONT_CREATE_BBT
The testing branch of u-boot-nand-flash already has NAND_SKIP_BBT
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 04:53:14PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> I support this, but then we should *always* print this message, not
> only "when it starts in an interactive mode" (or some guys could try
> to get away by disabling interactive mode).
Such a restriction is (fortunately) not enfor
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 11:37:13AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > > 4026 06/18 Jason McMullan [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] mtd: SPI Flash:
> > > Winbond W25X16/WX2532/WX2564 support 4027 06/19 Jason McMullan
> > > [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] mtd: SPI Flash: Support the ST Microelectronics
> > > M2
On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 01:05:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> * Current NAND code (the "Constants for hardware specific CLE/ALE/NCE
> functions" in "include/linux/mtd/nand.h", lines 75ff, break building
> on some boards like NETPHONE, NETTA, NETTA2, NETTA_ISDN, NETVIA_V2,
> SXNI855T (which
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>> From: Anton Vorontsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> Using current driver elbc sometimes hangs during nand write. Reading back
>> last byte helps though (thanks to Scott Wood for the idea).
>&
Jason McMullan wrote:
> Currently, "nand dump.oob" is a no-op.
>
> This commit makes it functional.
nand dump.oob is implemented in the testing branch of u-boot-nand-flash,
which I hope to merge next window.
-Scott
-
Spons
Jens Gehrlein wrote:
> Today, I updated my local git tree to the current U-Boot. Running my
> board I saw the message "RAM Configuration:", which didn't appear before.
>
> I think the reason is the following:
> nand.h includes linux/mtd/mtd.h, which defines a macro
> #define DEBUG(n, args...) do
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 06:52:46AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This patch adds support for CONFIG_NAND_LAZY_SCAN configuration option.
> With this option enabled mtd layer wouldn't scan NAND bbt during boot,
> bbt will be scanned when first bad block check is performed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Il
On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 02:02:47PM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote:
> This patch is the first step to consolidate the UIC related defines in the
> 4xx headers. Move header from asm-ppc/ppc4xx-intvec.h to
> asm-ppc/ppc4xx-uic.h as it will hold all UIC related defines in the next
> steps.
>
> Signed-off-b
On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 11:31:18AM +0800, Bernard Blackham wrote:
> > It seems odd that backwards compatibility requires turning *off* an
> > option with "compatible" in the name... I'd invert the sense of the
> > ifdef, and have it be something like CFG_BROKEN_ECC_COMPATIBILITY.
>
> The conc
Ilya Yanok wrote:
> diff --git a/common/cmd_nand.c b/common/cmd_nand.c
> index 37eb41b..6f5d13d 100644
> --- a/common/cmd_nand.c
> +++ b/common/cmd_nand.c
> @@ -236,6 +236,8 @@ int do_nand(cmd_tbl_t * cmdtp, int flag, int argc,
> char *argv[])
> }
> nand = &nand_info[nand_curr_device];
>
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 01:20:28PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 11:04:55AM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:
> > rohit h wrote:
> > > Hello everyone.
> > > I have got a modified u-boot source which boots vanilla 2.6.22 kernel,
> > > but is unable to
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 11:04:55AM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:
> rohit h wrote:
> > Hello everyone.
> > I have got a modified u-boot source which boots vanilla 2.6.22 kernel,
> > but is unable to boot vanilla 2.6.25.
>
> 1.1.4 is too old to boot such a modern kernel.
No, it's not -- it should be qui
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 04:30:06PM +0200, Marcel Ziswiler wrote:
> Fixes an issue with chip->state not always being set causing troubles.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marcel Ziswiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c |4
> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 04:13:46PM +0200, Marcel Ziswiler wrote:
> The writeenv() and readenv() calls introduced by the recently added bad block
> management for environment variables were missing casts therefore producing
> compile time warnings.
> While at it fixing some typo in a comment and ind
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 01:03:47PM +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 1)Is NAND BOOT possible on MPC8323?
No, 8323 does not support NAND booting. You need a chip with an enhanced
local bus controller (831x, 837x).
Please don't post the same question multiple times, and please fix the date
on your
This is particularly problematic now that non-NAND-specific code is
including , and thus all debugging code is being compiled
regardless of whether it was requested, as reported by Scott McNutt
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
cpu/arm926ejs/da
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 11:42:29AM -0400, Scott McNutt wrote:
>
> lib_arm/board.c now includes nand.h
> which in turn includes linux/mtd/mtd.h
> which defines DEBUG
>
> So all of the #ifdef DEBUG code is getting built, which I'm sure
> isn't intentional.
>
> I'm not sure if this was alread
mark roths wrote:
> Sorry if this has been covered already, the problem exists in all the u-boot
> versions I have up to 1.2.0.
1.2.0 is rather old; you should check the latest code when submitting
bug reports and patches.
> *** ../u-boot-1.1.5/drivers/nand/nand_ecc.c 2006-10-20
> 08:54:33.0
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 08:58:07AM -0400, Philip Balister wrote:
> While compiling Hugo's Lyrtech SFFSDR board patch on a very recent git,
> I ran into this problem. (Warning, this patch comes from Thunderbird,
> I'm on vacation :)
>
> diff --git a/common/env_nand.c b/common/env_nand.c
> index
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 02:01:29PM +0200, Morten Ebbell Hestens wrote:
> patch for branch mtd-2.6.22.1 on git://git.denx.de/u-boot-nand-flash.git
>
> nand read(.jffs2|.e|.i) skips bad blocks during read.
> write(.jffs2|.e|.i) skips bad blocks during write
> nand read will read 0xff for bad block.
This fix is required for MPC8360ERDK to build.
The following changes since commit a94f22f08f280905926219e568568964cb9eeb9d:
Andy Fleming (1):
Fix build issue with string.h and linux/string.h
are available in the git repository at:
git://www.denx.de/git/u-boot-nand-flash.git master
W
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 02:35:36PM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote:
> I have to admit that I don't remember all the details anymore. And I don't
> have the time to fully review those changes again right now. So if you
> really need my Signed-off-by for me handling/merging those patches from
> William, he
The following changes since commit 8155efbd7ae9c65564ca98affe94631d612ae088:
Wolfgang Denk (1):
Merge branch 'master' of ssh://mercury/home/wd/git/u-boot/master
are available in the git repository at:
git://www.denx.de/git/u-boot-nand-flash.git master
Stuart Wood (1):
env_nand.
There are several patches from William Juul in the mtd-2.6.22.1 branch of
u-boot-nand-flash that are missing Signed-off-by lines. William or
Stefan, can you provide sign-offs for these?
-Scott
-
Check out the new SourceForge
On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 12:29:26PM -0400, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
> diff --git a/common/cmd_fdt.c b/common/cmd_fdt.c
> index ede65ae..8592128 100644
> --- a/common/cmd_fdt.c
> +++ b/common/cmd_fdt.c
> @@ -403,7 +403,8 @@ int do_fdt (cmd_tbl_t * cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char
> *argv[])
> }
>
> common/cmd_ide.c | 19 ++-
> common/cmd_nand.c | 38 --
> common/cmd_scsi.c | 15 ---
> common/cmd_usb.c | 15 ---
> 6 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 57 deletion
rrect NAND erase percentage output
Scott Wood (3):
NAND: Provide a sane default for NAND_MAX_CHIPS.
Make onenand_uboot.h self-sufficient.
Remove prototypes of nand_init() in favor of including nand.h.
Stuart Wood (1):
env_nand.c: Added bad block management for environment
only 8 bit accessors implemented */
> - if (fun->width != 1)
> + if (fun->width != 8 && fun->width != 16 && fun->width != 32)
The above comment looks like it should be removed.
Otherwise, Acked-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
Grant Erickson wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestion. That solved it. As an academic exercise, is there
> any practical reason a system would want to use nboot, as I erroneously
> chose to do, without .i|.jffs2|.e?
I don't think so, though I don't know the history involved. Does anyone
actually use
On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 12:09:30PM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> 83xx/85xx/86xx: add more MxMR local bus definitions
>
> This patch adds more macro definitions for the UPM Machine Mode Registers
> They are copied from "include/mpc82xx.h" to simplify the merge of all 8xxx
> common local bus d
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 04:05:28PM -0400, Stuart Wood wrote:
> Scott, I this this one is it, and thnaks for pointing out the
> nand_erase_opts() function.
>
> Stuart
>
> ---
> Modified to check for bad blocks and to skipping over them when
> CFG_ENV_RANGE has been defined.
> CFG_ENV_RANGE must be
M before the NAND controller
> can get accessed. When initdram() is called later on in nand_boot(),
> this can lead to problems with variables in the bss sections like
> nand_ecc_pos[].
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Roese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Acked-by: Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
P
Stefan Roese wrote:
> This patch removes the SDRAM initilization call initdram() from
> nand_boot(). This is done mainly because I experienced problems with
> some boards like Kilauea (405EX), which don't have internal SRAM (OCM)
> and relocation needs to be done to SDRAM before the NAND controller
Stefan Roese wrote:
> On Monday 02 June 2008, Scott Wood wrote:
>> but even then I'd
>> rather use the space for things like SPD-based SDRAM initialization.
>
> Are you talking about a full-blown I2C SPD DIMM detection and
> autoconfiguration? The code I know fro
On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 08:22:21AM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote:
> Hi Grant,
>
> On Monday 02 June 2008, Grant Erickson wrote:
> > Before I jump in with the BDI and start debugging, has anyone else using
> > 'nboot' and FIT images noticed that 'nboot' periodically fails where 'nand
> > read.i' of the
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 03:11:27PM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote:
> One advantage of the current nand_spl subsystem is that it uses the same NAND
> board/platform driver as the "normal", full blown U-Boot NAND subsystem does.
> So there is no need to maintain multiple NAND drivers for one board/platf
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 06:47:21AM +0800, Liu Dave wrote:
>
> ---
> cpu/mpc83xx/start.S | 310
> ---
> 1 files changed, 220 insertions(+), 90 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/cpu/mpc83xx/start.S b/cpu/mpc83xx/start.S
> index 309eb30..39bcaa8 100644
>
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 03:02:54PM -0700, Ron Madrid wrote:
> So am I just stuck until then, since we clearly shouldn't put old drivers
> into the code, but the
> mtd branch is not rebased yet?
Yes, unless you want to target the current mtd-2.6.22.1 branch (I don't
know how much has changed that
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 02:01:09PM -0700, Ron Madrid wrote:
> So does this mean that I need to now base all of my patches off of the
> mtd-2.6.22.1 branch on the
> u-boot-nand-flash tree? How do the two (u-boot and u-boot-nand-flash)
> coincide, or don't they?
> It looks like in the Makefile of
1 - 100 of 186 matches
Mail list logo
