Haavard Skinnemoen wrote: <snip>
> Right...I'm beginning to doubt that anyone is familiar enough with the > u-boot code, since everyone seems to have their own opinion about how > things are supposed to work. > > To summarize, here are the possible ways to fix the problem as I see it: > - Use virtual address in CONFIG_ENV_ADDR to conform with the way the > CFI driver currently works. Rejected by Wolfgang because virtual > addresses don't exist. > - Fix the API and user interface breakage by reverting commit > 09ce9921. Rejected because virtual addresses are used everywhere. > - Fix it by using map_physmem() in a way that works for all > architectures. Rejected because all other architectures than PPC > are evil and need to be punished for doing things differently. Your "triple revert" patch doesn't look overly complex, and seems to only add a few map_physmem() calls (I'm summarising *quite* a bit there !!). Is there not some way using weak functions (or similar) to add some AVR32 specific workarounds. Or ... there's *plenty* of arch specific #ifdefs in most of the rest of u-boot, so could we not just "#ifdef AVR32" the existing code for the time being until this sticking point gets unstuck ? > - Introduce a custom flash driver for ATNGW100. Rejected because > stupid principles are more important than making things work. > > So I don't really know where to proceed from here. I guess two > additional options are forking the damn thing or creating a proprietary > bootloader, but I don't really want to do either. Me neither !! Mark _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot