Hi Stefan, > This patch adds another build target for the AMCC Sequoia PPC440EPx > eval board. This RAM-booting version is targeted for boards without > NOR FLASH (NAND booting) which need a possibility to initially > program their NAND FLASH. Using a JTAG debugger (e.g. BDI2000/3000) > configured to setup the SDRAM, this debugger can load this RAM- > booting image to the target address in SDRAM (in this case 0x1000000) > and start it there. Then U-Boot's standard NAND commands can be > used to program the NAND FLASH (e.g. "nand write ..."). > > Here the commands to load and start this image from the BDI2000: > > 440EPX>load 0x1000000 /tftpboot/sequoia/u-boot.bin > 440EPX>go 0x1000000 > > Please note that this image automatically scans for an already > initialized SDRAM TLB (detected by EPN=0). This TLB will not be > cleared. So your debugger should configure the SDRAM TLB correctly > (as done in the standard Sequoia BDI init script). > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Roese <s...@denx.de> > --- > Makefile | 11 +++ > board/amcc/sequoia/init.S | 7 ++ > board/amcc/sequoia/sdram.c | 3 +- > board/amcc/sequoia/sequoia.c | 12 +++- > board/amcc/sequoia/u-boot-ram.lds | 126 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > cpu/ppc4xx/start.S | 33 ++++++++-- > include/configs/amcc-common.h | 11 +++ > include/configs/sequoia.h | 30 +++++++-- > 8 files changed, 215 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 board/amcc/sequoia/u-boot-ram.lds >
[...] > diff --git a/board/amcc/sequoia/sequoia.c b/board/amcc/sequoia/sequoia.c > index e824b8f..8b23823 100644 > --- a/board/amcc/sequoia/sequoia.c > +++ b/board/amcc/sequoia/sequoia.c > @@ -33,7 +33,9 @@ > > DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > > +#if !defined(CONFIG_SYS_NO_FLASH) > extern flash_info_t flash_info[CONFIG_SYS_MAX_FLASH_BANKS]; /* info for > FLASH chips */ > +#endif > > extern void __ft_board_setup(void *blob, bd_t *bd); > ulong flash_get_size(ulong base, int banknum); > @@ -122,9 +124,9 @@ int board_early_init_f(void) > > int misc_init_r(void) > { > - uint pbcr; > - int size_val = 0; > - u32 reg; > + __attribute__((unused)) uint pbcr; > + __attribute__((unused)) int size_val = 0; > + __attribute__((unused)) u32 reg; Am I correct to assume that this should shut up warnings for the ifdef case? If so, it still seems to be a somewhat rude way to do it. How long will it take the gcc maintainers to produce a "warning: unused variable is used" warning? ;) Cheers Detlev -- Wenn ein Kopf und ein Buch zusammenstossen und es klingt hohl; ist denn das allemal im Buche? - Lichtenberg -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-40 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: d...@denx.de _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot