Alexander Holler wrote: > Am 03.04.2010 20:36, schrieb Tom: >> Alexander Holler wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Holler <hol...@ahsoftware.de> >>> --- >>> include/asm-arm/arch-at91/at91sam9260.h | 2 ++ >>> include/asm-arm/arch-at91/at91sam9261.h | 2 ++ >>> include/asm-arm/arch-at91/at91sam9263.h | 3 +++ >>> 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>> >> >> Ack >> This change is fine. >> Please include this with the changes to the rtc driver in patch 2/2 >> In general, include all the patches in a patchset when you make a change >> to any one of them. > > This two patches are unrelated. This patch just makes incomplete headers > more complete. If something else would use those two defines and anyone > would revert the patch for rtc-driver the revert would eleminate the > defines too. >
Patch 2/2 depends on patch 1/2. From 2/2 +#define gpbr_readl() \ + readl(AT91_GPBR_BASE + 4 * CONFIG_RTC_AT91SAM9_GPBR) +#define gpbr_writel(val) \ + writel((val), AT91_GPBR_BASE + 4 * CONFIG_RTC_AT91SAM9_GPBR) From 1/2 --- a/include/asm-arm/arch-at91/at91sam9260.h +++ b/include/asm-arm/arch-at91/at91sam9260.h @@ -56,8 +56,10 @@ #define AT91_PIO_BASE 0xfffff400 #define AT91_PMC_BASE 0xfffffc00 #define AT91_RSTC_BASE 0xfffffd00 +#define AT91_RTT_BASE 0xfffffd20 #define AT91_PIT_BASE 0xfffffd30 #define AT91_WDT_BASE 0xfffffd40 +#define AT91_GPR_BASE 0xfffffd50 From inspection, at least some boards would have an error if 1/2 was not applied before 2/2. 1/2 is ok by itself. I will go ahead and apply this patch. Thanks Tom _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot