June 2003 - U-Boot

RE: [U-Boot-Users] Generic ARM Error with respect to usage of r8 in start.S's.
by Woodruff, Richard 24 Jun '03

24 Jun '03

> > What is it you don't see? Why we reserve R8 for global data? > The u-boot for ARM code defines and uses global data which is not referenced using r8 (can be seen by all). The code as currently generated only uses r8 to access into the bd_info structure and its members. As it is, the bd_info structure is allocated on the C stack in start_armboot(), there is nothing special about the sdram which its allocated in. The structure could have as easily been defined as a global above, just like flash_info[] or any other structure is. There is no selective relocation...it don't really use C code features until it has a stack. Yes the flexibility to do different things is there which is good, unfortunately the leaving of expansion hooks which break the existing code somewhat defeats its usefulness. Regards, Richard W.

2 1

Re: [U-Boot-Users] MPC860T POST
by Vuong My-Hong 24 Jun '03

24 Jun '03

Hi, Sorry if I didn't make it clear enough. I'm using version 3.0.4 of gcc. I downloaded a copy of u-boot-0.3.0 and I'm seeing the same error: make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/myhong/u-boot-0.3.0/drivers' make[1]: Entering directory `/home/myhong/u-boot-0.3.0/post' powerpc-linux-gcc -Wa,-gstabs -D__ASSEMBLY__ -g -Os -mrelocatable -ffixed-r14 -meabi -mrelocatable -ffixed-r14 -meabi -D__KERNEL__ -DTEXT_BASE=0x40000000 -I/home/myhong/u-boot-0.3.0/include -fno-builtin -pipe -DCONFIG_PPC -D__powerpc__ -DCONFIG_8xx -ffixed-r2 -ffixed-r29 -mstring -mcpu=860 -msoft-float -DCONFIG_PPC -D__powerpc__ -DCONFIG_8xx -ffixed-r2 -ffixed-r29 -mstring -mcpu=860 -msoft-float -c -o cache_8xx.o /home/myhong/u-boot-0.3.0/post/cache_8xx.S powerpc-linux-gcc -g -Os -mrelocatable -ffixed-r14 -meabi -mrelocatable -ffixed-r14 -meabi -D__KERNEL__ -DTEXT_BASE=0x40000000 -I/home/myhong/u-boot-0.3.0/include -fno-builtin -pipe -DCONFIG_PPC -D__powerpc__ -DCONFIG_8xx -ffixed-r2 -ffixed-r29 -mstring -mcpu=860 -msoft-float -DCONFIG_PPC -D__powerpc__ -DCONFIG_8xx -ffixed-r2 -ffixed-r29 -mstring -mcpu=860 -msoft-float -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -c -o post.o post.c {standard input}: Assembler messages: {standard input}:676: Error: Relocation cannot be done when using -mrelocatable {standard input}:682: Error: Relocation cannot be done when using -mrelocatable {standard input}:688: Error: Relocation cannot be done when using -mrelocatable make[1]: *** [post.o] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/myhong/u-boot-0.3.0/post' make: *** [subdirs] Error 1 myhong@nemo ~/u-boot-0.3.0 $powerpc-linux-gcc -dumpversion 3.0.4 Regards, My Hong ------------------------------------------------------------------ Acoustic Mine Imaging Thales Underwater Systems 274 Victoria Road Rydalmere NSW 2116 +61 2 9848 3872 +61404 483 823 My-Hong.Vuong(a)au.thalesgroup.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Wolfgang Denk 06/23/03 05:25pm >>> In message <sef6ed4e.055(a)gw_tus_syd3.tus.au.thales> you wrote: > > I'm working with an MPC860T on a custom designed board, using > ppcboot-2.0.0. I've only recently tried to turn on the POSTs that is PPCBoot is dead. Please use U-Boot instead. > offered with ppcboot/uboot and have tried to > #define CONFIG_POST (CFG_POST_RTC | \ > CFG_POST_MEMORY | \ > CFG_POST_CPU | \ > CFG_POST_CACHE | \ > CFG_POST_UART | \ > CFG_POST_ETHER \ > ) > > However, on compilation, I get the following: > > {standard input}: Assembler messages: > {standard input}:513: Error: Relocation cannot be done when using > -mrelocatable > {standard input}:519: Error: Relocation cannot be done when using > -mrelocatable > {standard input}:525: Error: Relocation cannot be done when using > -mrelocatable You have omitted the interesting part: the command line causing the error. It seems to me you are not using the correct command line switches. > Any ideas? should I be able to compile this with version 3.0.4? If > so, how can I get this to work? Version 3.0.4 of what? Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88 Email: wd(a)denx.de Another Armenia, Belgium ... the weak innocents who always seem to be located on a natural invasion route. -- Kirk, "Errand of Mercy", stardate 3198.4 ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner. Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission! INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users(a)lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users

2 1

[U-Boot-Users] Generic ARM Error with respect to usage of r8 in start.S's.
by Woodruff, Richard 24 Jun '03

24 Jun '03

Hello, I'm just fixing a bug which I see exists in all the ARM ports. I just wrote a bit of code for my arm925 which caused an exception, given the way the code is written one would expect that it would print an error frame then possibly reset....instead it just locked up. Tracing the code I see that the exception code in start.S for all ARM ports uses r8 as a frame pointer. This is NOT allowed as r8 is reserved as the global data pointer....given the way the ARM code currently operates I don't see why this has to be, but it might be handy if someone was trying to use C before the memory controller was up (this is not the case for the ARM code today). Anyway, what you will see is : A-- Program does something bad -- takes the exception -- the exception trashes r8 -- the code attempts to print the error, unfortunately the print code tries to use r8 to find some info... -- The dereference of the bad global data pointer messes up proper operation, resulting in another data abort -- Goto A: For myself, I'll may just remove the setting of the frame pointer into r8, it really gains you nothing in this code. If exceptions were to be handled perhaps it might be useful, but it still shouldn't be necessary as you should be able to unwind the stack with out doing this. I'll have to do a little thinking to see what is correct. I'd submit patches but I don't have other ARMs to test on so I'll just fix my 925 tree. Having boot code which can get into an infinite loop is not a good thing and forces power cycles for recovery. Re-looking I see the cpu/920 recently removed its r8 call for abort recovery, it did not however remove it for its irq sources. So it could have some problems when the irq function derefereced the pointer. Regards, Richard Woodruff.

2 1

Re: [U-Boot-Users] [PPCBoot-users] Using gcc-3.4 to compile u-boo t on powerpc
by Vuong My-Hong 24 Jun '03

24 Jun '03

Hi Murray, Is there a similar fix for gcc 3.0.4? Thanks, My Hong ------------------------------------------------------------------ Acoustic Mine Imaging Thales Underwater Systems 274 Victoria Road Rydalmere NSW 2116 +61 2 9848 3872 +61404 483 823 My-Hong.Vuong(a)au.thalesgroup.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Murray Jensen 06/23/03 12:06pm >>> Hi All, a small but important thing... I am using the latest gcc from cvs (3.4 20030608 (experimental)) and if you build the cross compiler for a powerpc/linux target, it leaves out the "fixup" stuff for the "-mrelocatable" command line option. If you then want to use that cross compiler to build "u-boot", it stuffs up with messages from the Assembler that looks something like this (on certain C files): ... Error: Relocation cannot be done when using -mrelocatable Since "-mrelocatable" is usually not used for Linux programs, I can't see why they did this. Rather than have two different cross compilers, one for linux and one for "other", which you use to compile u-boot, I chose a simple fix - patch the file "gcc/config/rs6000/linux.h" as follows: --- linux.h 2003/06/13 16:41:53 1.3 +++ linux.h 2003/06/20 01:28:53 @@ -84,7 +84,8 @@ #define TARGET_64BIT 0 /* We don't need to generate entries in .fixup. */ -#undef RELOCATABLE_NEEDS_FIXUP +/* well I do need them! */ +#define RELOCATABLE_NEEDS_FIXUP #define TARGET_ASM_FILE_END file_end_indicate_exec_stack Hope this helps someone. Cheers! Murray... -- Murray Jensen, CSIRO Manufacturing & Infra. Tech. Phone: +61 3 9662 7763 Locked Bag No. 9, Preston, Vic, 3072, Australia. Fax: +61 3 9662 7853 Internet: Murray.Jensen(a)csiro.au Hymod project: http://www.msa.cmst.csiro.au/projects/Hymod/ To the extent permitted by law, CSIRO does not represent, warrant and/or guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been maintained or that the communication is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. The information contained in this e-mail may be confidential or privileged. Any unauthorised use or disclosure is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it immediately and notify Murray Jensen on +61 3 9662 7763. Thank you. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner. Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission! INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php _______________________________________________ PPCBoot-users mailing list PPCBoot-users(a)lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ppcboot-users ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner. Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission! INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users(a)lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users

1 0

[U-Boot-Users] script examples...
by Michael Frey 23 Jun '03

23 Jun '03

Does anyone have an example of a script that does conditional work (i.e. if then else stuff)? I want to have a script that checks for a file on an MMC card and do something if there and if not there do another. Thanks, Michael Frey

3 5

[U-Boot-Users] warnings, boards, RE: [PATCH]: Enable device ...
by Woodruff, Richard 23 Jun '03

23 Jun '03

Hello Wolfgang, Yes, I fixed all but one type of warning in my tree this weekend. I was somewhat embarrassed that I didn't fix the two simple ones in the patch I sent. I shall be more careful. One type of warning does still exist in my build and likely others which seems to deal with complaints about an error exit goto label: flash.c: In function `flash_print_info': flash.c:172: warning: deprecated use of label at end of compound statement smc91111.c: In function `smc_phy_configure': smc91111.c:1353: warning: deprecated use of label at end of compound statement Is there a clean way to make this warning go away while keeping the code savings by using the goto in these cases? I've not tried very hard to make it go away... Also, I was wondering when its appropriate to attempt to add a board into the main tree. I have a working port to a new processor type, but the board I'm working on is only a stepping stone to a more main stream board. Putting code for this board into the main tree will result in a port which won't be maintained, but does have some value for others doing trying to do the same....at the moment I plan to hold off and submit the other board when it enters production....but I don't really want to have to redo work if someone else enters a port in the mean time... Best Regards, Richard W. -----Original Message----- From: Wolfgang Denk [mailto:wd@denx.de] Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2003 11:37 AM To: Woodruff, Richard Cc: U-Boot Users Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Enable device and console for ARM (III). * Make sure to run the MAKEALL script, and resolve ALL compiler warnings introduced by your patch.

2 1

[U-Boot-Users] PXA MMC question...
by Michael Frey 23 Jun '03

23 Jun '03

Has anyone used the MMC commands? I have enabled the MMC port on my board and can init mmc by issuing the mmcinit command and it finds the card. My question is one that is done how can I list the contents of the card or better yet flash and image on the card to flash? Thanks, Michael Frey

3 2

[U-Boot-Users] MPC860T POST
by Vuong My-Hong 23 Jun '03

23 Jun '03

Hi all, I'm working with an MPC860T on a custom designed board, using ppcboot-2.0.0. I've only recently tried to turn on the POSTs that is offered with ppcboot/uboot and have tried to #define CONFIG_POST (CFG_POST_RTC | \ CFG_POST_MEMORY | \ CFG_POST_CPU | \ CFG_POST_CACHE | \ CFG_POST_UART | \ CFG_POST_ETHER \ ) However, on compilation, I get the following: {standard input}: Assembler messages: {standard input}:513: Error: Relocation cannot be done when using -mrelocatable {standard input}:519: Error: Relocation cannot be done when using -mrelocatable {standard input}:525: Error: Relocation cannot be done when using -mrelocatable make[1]: *** [post.o] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/vobs/wecc/ppcboot-2.0.0/post' make: *** [subdirs] Error 1 myhong@nemo /vobs/wecc/ppcboot-2.0.0 $powerpc-linux-gcc -dumpversion 3.0.4 Any ideas? should I be able to compile this with version 3.0.4? If so, how can I get this to work? Thanks in advance, My Hong Vuong ------------------------------------------------------------------ Acoustic Mine Imaging Thales Underwater Systems 274 Victoria Road Rydalmere NSW 2116 +61 2 9848 3872 +61404 483 823 My-Hong.Vuong(a)au.thalesgroup.com ------------------------------------------------------------------

3 4

[U-Boot-Users] [PPCBoot-users] Using gcc-3.4 to compile u-boot on powerpc
by Murray Jensen 23 Jun '03

23 Jun '03

Hi All, a small but important thing... I am using the latest gcc from cvs (3.4 20030608 (experimental)) and if you build the cross compiler for a powerpc/linux target, it leaves out the "fixup" stuff for the "-mrelocatable" command line option. If you then want to use that cross compiler to build "u-boot", it stuffs up with messages from the Assembler that looks something like this (on certain C files): ... Error: Relocation cannot be done when using -mrelocatable Since "-mrelocatable" is usually not used for Linux programs, I can't see why they did this. Rather than have two different cross compilers, one for linux and one for "other", which you use to compile u-boot, I chose a simple fix - patch the file "gcc/config/rs6000/linux.h" as follows: --- linux.h 2003/06/13 16:41:53 1.3 +++ linux.h 2003/06/20 01:28:53 @@ -84,7 +84,8 @@ #define TARGET_64BIT 0 /* We don't need to generate entries in .fixup. */ -#undef RELOCATABLE_NEEDS_FIXUP +/* well I do need them! */ +#define RELOCATABLE_NEEDS_FIXUP #define TARGET_ASM_FILE_END file_end_indicate_exec_stack Hope this helps someone. Cheers! Murray... -- Murray Jensen, CSIRO Manufacturing & Infra. Tech. Phone: +61 3 9662 7763 Locked Bag No. 9, Preston, Vic, 3072, Australia. Fax: +61 3 9662 7853 Internet: Murray.Jensen(a)csiro.au Hymod project: http://www.msa.cmst.csiro.au/projects/Hymod/ To the extent permitted by law, CSIRO does not represent, warrant and/or guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been maintained or that the communication is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. The information contained in this e-mail may be confidential or privileged. Any unauthorised use or disclosure is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it immediately and notify Murray Jensen on +61 3 9662 7763. Thank you. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner. Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission! INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php _______________________________________________ PPCBoot-users mailing list PPCBoot-users(a)lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ppcboot-users

1 0

[U-Boot-Users] Pending patches to go into 0.4.0 release?
by Wolfgang Denk 22 Jun '03

22 Jun '03

Hi everybody, according to my list I have now either added or rejected all pending patches. The only open issues I can remember is a couple of patches by Robert Schwebel. Robert, when can you solve the problems and resubmit the patches? Did I miss anything else? Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88 Email: wd(a)denx.de Accident: A condition in which presence of mind is good, but absence of body is better.

2 1

[U-Boot-Users] [PATCH]: Enable device and console for ARM (III).
by Woodruff, Richard 22 Jun '03

22 Jun '03

Wolfgang, Here is the patch re-submitted removing the movement of the trab specific code. I just rebuilt it and tried it out on my board and it works. No surprise as I don't have anything trab specific. The trab not working still surprises me, hopefully this change will fix it. Getting the console working is a GOOD thing for ARM. Being able to use control^c and enabling a clean stdin/out/err is something which should be made to work. The patch is as before, enables device and console on ARM and sets the baudrate such that bdinfo prints something reasonable. Regards, Richard W.

2 1

FW: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] IBM 750FX support
by Tom Guilliams 21 Jun '03

21 Jun '03

CHANGELOG patch added. Same 750FX patch file attached as before. ------------ The attached patch file adds support the IBM750FX processor. As discussed yesterday on the mailing list, to enable support a "CONFIG_750FX" option has been added for the new HID1 pll multipliers table as well as the additional 4 IBATS and 4 DBATS setup. Modified files are - README cpu/74xx_7xx/cpu.c cpu/74xx_7xx/speed.c cpu/74xx_7xx/start.S include/74xx_7xx.h include/asm-ppc/processor.h First submitted patch. Awaiting your comments. Tom

2 1

[U-Boot-Users] uploading OS over network instead of u-boot downloading it from a server.
by Brian S. Park 21 Jun '03

21 Jun '03

Hi all, Is it possible to configure/modify u-Boot so that we upload OS image to it and boot? i.e. instead of u-Boot getting image from a tftp server, it waits for network connection to receive the OS image. If it is possible, we can save some money on flash since we only need to put a flash large enough to hold u-Booot instead of u-Boot+Linux+file system. Thanks. =============================================================== Brian S. Park brian(a)corelis.com (562) 926-6727 x143 --------------------------------------------------------------- Everything we do helps our customers get to market FASTER with HIGHER quality and LOWER cost ===============================================================

2 3

RE: [U-Boot-Users] Using NAND with JFFS2.
by Dave Ellis 20 Jun '03

20 Jun '03

Richard Woodruff [mailto:r-woodruff2@ti.com] wrote: > Has anyone used adapted/used any of the u-boot JFFS2 code to be NAND aware? > A very quick look at the JFFS2 code (called by fsload, fsinfo, ..) seems to > indicate to me that reading of raw data is done via a straight memcpy > (direct dereference, assuming linear flash). I'm wondering if making it > work might be as simple as conditionalizing that code to call the nand_mtd > read.j equivalents....unfortunately few things are ever just simple... I have it working, but in a simpler way. I have a 2 MiB boot partition at the start of the nand flash (with just the kernel image and maybe a backup kernel). I read the whole partition to RAM and let JFFS2 read it from there. nand read.j 400000 0 200000; fsload 200000 image; bootm 200000 The only tricky part is that the configuration options for JFFS2 only work with memory in NOR flash, so I used CFG_JFFS_CUSTOM_PART and implemented jffs2_part_info() so it points to RAM. Someday it would be good (IMHO) to accept CFG_JFFS2_BASE and CFG_JFFS2_SIZE as an alternative (even for NOR flash) to the sector/bank scheme (CFG_JFFS2_FIRST_SECTOR, etc.). Copying the NAND to RAM means each sector is only read from NAND once, which is good since both reading the NAND and doing the ECC calculations can be slow. > The ideal case is to just allow the kernel to be part of the filesytem, > though I suppose it might not be strictly necessary and a raw partition > which ignores bad blocks might be enough....at the moment I'm wondering how > one safely draw the lines of how big a partition would need to be at the > "physical" level to guarantee that your kernel will always fit, assuming > some of the blocks go bad over time. If you use a separate boot partition very few blocks should wear out, since they won't be written very often. The safest way to update the kernel is to load the new kernel without deleting the old one, so if you allow twice the largest possible size of your kernel plus 15 or 20 erase blocks for JFFS2 overhead and bad blocks, you should be OK. But NAND is cheap and kernels grow, so I would allocate more if possible. With the kernel in a larger partition with lots of files booting is slow, since both reading the flash and sorting all of the file fragments take a lot of time. Dave Dave Ellis ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SIXNET - "Leading the Industrial Ethernet Revolution" 331 Ushers Road, P.O. Box 767, Clifton Park, NY 12065 USA Tel +1 (518) 877-5173 Fax +1 (518) 877-8346 Email me at: dge(a)sixnetio.com Detailed product info: www.sixnetio.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

[U-Boot-Users] Re: EmbeddedPlanet EP862
by Yun-Fong Loh 20 Jun '03

20 Jun '03

XOL, I have some modifications that will allow u-boot to boot Linux on an EP862-1.1 board. Are you still looking for info on this? Yun

1 0

RE: [U-Boot-Users] Using NAND with JFFS2.
by Woodruff, Richard 20 Jun '03

20 Jun '03

> ...I had read at Infradead.org and sort of gathered that the > JFFS2 sequence numbers allows you to write blocks most > anywhere as long as the blocks are contigus...and that when > jffs2 comes up it will scan the whole thing building a proper > access map/list. Blocks are contigus .... Meaning data with in a block is contiguous, whole blocks can live in any order.

1 0

[U-Boot-Users] Using NAND with JFFS2.
by Woodruff, Richard 20 Jun '03

20 Jun '03

Hello, Has anyone used adapted/used any of the u-boot JFFS2 code to be NAND aware? A very quick look at the JFFS2 code (called by fsload, fsinfo, ..) seems to indicate to me that reading of raw data is done via a straight memcpy (direct dereference, assuming linear flash). I'm wondering if making it work might be as simple as conditionalizing that code to call the nand_mtd read.j equivalents....unfortunately few things are ever just simple... The ideal case is to just allow the kernel to be part of the filesytem, though I suppose it might not be strictly necessary and a raw partition which ignores bad blocks might be enough....at the moment I'm wondering how one safely draw the lines of how big a partition would need to be at the "physical" level to guarantee that your kernel will always fit, assuming some of the blocks go bad over time. ...I had read at Infradead.org and sort of gathered that the JFFS2 sequence numbers allows you to write blocks most anywhere as long as the blocks are contigus...and that when jffs2 comes up it will scan the whole thing building a proper access map/list. Any input would be welcomed. Regards, Richard W.

1 0

RE: [U-Boot-Users] RE: [PATCH] Enable device and console for
by Jerry Van Baren 20 Jun '03

20 Jun '03

At 06:37 PM 6/19/2003 -0400, r-woodruff2(a)ti.com wrote: >Another quick look at the source shows a couple of things. [snip] >...you are amazingly responsive for someone seven hours ahead... > >Best Regards, > >Richard W. Well, THAT explains why I often receive Wolfgang's responses on the email list before I see the question. ;-) gvb ********************************************************************** This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may be confidential and may be legally privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. This e-mail and its files are intended solely for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed and their content is the property of Smiths Aerospace. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the e-mail administrator at postmaster(a)smiths-aerospace.com and then delete this e-mail, its files and any copies. This footnote also confirms that this e-mail message has been scanned for the presence of known computer viruses. Smiths addresses are changing! The new addresses are of the form firstname.lastname(a)smiths-aerospace.com. Please update your address books! Please begin using the new form immediately. ***********************************************************************

1 0

[U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] 2/4: bootz command
by Robert Schwebel 20 Jun '03

20 Jun '03

Hi, Some time ago Holger Schurig has sent a command to boot normal zImages. Here's the patch against current CVS. Robert -- Dipl.-Ing. Robert Schwebel | http://www.pengutronix.de Pengutronix - Linux Solutions for Science and Industry Braunschweiger Str. 79, 31134 Hildesheim, Germany Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 Phone: +49-5121-28619-0 | Fax: +49-5121-28619-4

3 3

[U-Boot-Users] compressed/uncompressed kernel
by Gupta, Kshitij 20 Jun '03

20 Jun '03

hi, I am able to get my kernel booted up if use the compressed kernel image (arch/arm/boot/compressed/vmlinux) to make the uImage. But if I make uImage using the uncompressed kernel then it get stucks after it reaches the kernel entry point. Has any one seen this kind of behaviour or am I expected to use only the compressed kernel image with u-boot. regards -kshitij

2 1

RE: [U-Boot-Users] ROMFS & Uboot.
by Christophe.LINDHEIMER＠fr.thalesgroup.com 20 Jun '03

20 Jun '03

> > It seems that Romfs can be used as Initrd for booting > Linux. ( right ?? ) > > Aramdisk is just a block device. You can put any filesystem in it - > minix, ext2, you name it. > > > Is this supported by UBoot ? > > No. U-Boot has nothing to do with this. > > > Has anyone already done this ? > > romfs in an initial ramdisk? This makes little sense to me. > Well, my problem is that I am really short of ram. So I would like to have my filesystem in flash and keep it in flash. So I would like to have my root filesytem in flash ( possible ?? ). romfs seems to be a way to do it. It think the way to do it it to declare my romfs as initrd ( maybe I am wrong because initrd is init ram disk and it means that it MUST be a RW filesystem in RAM ??? ) After reading sources of U Boot it seems that if I put a second parameter at bootm, it is going to copy the initrd into RAM ( right ? ). whereas I would like to keep my romfs in flash. maybe I misunderstand and misuse completly the initrd... Help and hints welcome... Chris

3 2

[U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] Update NetVia with V2 board support
by Pantelis Antoniou 20 Jun '03

20 Jun '03

Wolfgang Hi The attached patch adds support in u-boot for the NetVia V2 board. Possible points of interest are: The LEDs are located on an external register so the status_led code got moved to the drivers directory and abstracted. The serial console is provided by a max3100 SPI/UART converter chip, file drivers/serial_max3100.c Awaiting comments... Regards Pantelis

2 3

[U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] - smc91c111.c driver.
by Woodruff, Richard 20 Jun '03

20 Jun '03

Hello, I added a function which causes the driver to handle MAC address in the way which is described in the main u-boot README. The most noticeable effect is settings of the ethaddr environment variable will now take effect when the driver is initialized. Previously, the driver did NOT attempt to sync with the environment variable settings and just used a hardcoded default. Sorry that I didn't add much as it relates to the actual ROM, as I don't have one on my board. I did test the interface code around it. I did add on error return check into net.c. I also fixed a minor spelling error Regards, Richard W.

2 1

RE: [U-Boot-Users] RE: [PATCH] Enable device and console for ARM (II).
by Woodruff, Richard 20 Jun '03

20 Jun '03

Another quick look at the source shows a couple of things. ++ every supported architecture does the malloc of syscalls_tbl. ++ console_setfile() currently requires it. ++ boot_command.c currently requires it. -- I'll retract the bit about console_init_r needing it, as I see that there is an alternative....and I wasn't using the syscall version anyway. Do you still feel its allocation should be coded around? I quickly re-submit a patch with the VFD movement removed. If needed I can attempt to clean up the console_setfile and place in boot_command.c which currently needs it...but I defiantly am not in a position to test all effected ports. ...you are amazingly responsive for someone seven hours ahead... Best Regards, Richard W. > -----Original Message----- > From: Woodruff, Richard > Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 6:04 PM > To: 'Wolfgang Denk' > Cc: u-boot-users(a)lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: [U-Boot-Users] RE: [PATCH] Enable device and console > for ARM (II). > > > Wolfgang, > > The syscalls table allocation _IS_ Necessary to make the > devices code, especially the console to work. In console.c : > console_setfile() looks up the proper function pointers by > using the syscalls table, console_init_r needs it also. You > know the table is all of 11 longs. Rewriting the code to > work differently would likely take up more space then using > the table....And syscalls will show up. > > As far as the VFD goes. I have no problem undoing the move. > I am nearly positive that its move would have any effect. My > rational was it should be in the devices init, so putting it > close was the next best thing to doing it correctly. > > Regards, > > Richard W. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Wolfgang Denk [mailto:wd@denx.de] > > Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 5:39 PM > > To: Woodruff, Richard > > Cc: u-boot-users(a)lists.sourceforge.net > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Enable device and console for ARM (II). > > > > > > In message > > <FD2AC9A020DDD51194710008C7089B20053D4C81(a)dlee17.itg.ti.com> > > you wrote: > > > > > > Here is an updated patch against u-boot.0.3.0 with console_init_f > > > defined. I added the call into what appears to be the > proper place, > > > into the init_sequence[], just like the PPC code does. > > > > Sorry, but I reject this patch for the same reasons I just > > rejected the earlier version of this patch. > > > > Again: the code is OK, and I want to include it, but you do > > a few things (VFD, syscalls) which you should leave as is. > > > > Please resubmit. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Wolfgang Denk > > > > -- > > Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, > Embedded Linux > > Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88 Email: > wd(a)denx.de > > Every little picofarad has a nanohenry all its own. - > Don Vonada > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU > Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU > Hosting Partner. > Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly > Commission! > INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot-Users mailing list > U-Boot-Users(a)lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users >

2 1

[U-Boot-Users] RE: [PATCH] Enable device and console for ARM (II).
by Woodruff, Richard 20 Jun '03

20 Jun '03

Wolfgang, The syscalls table allocation _IS_ Necessary to make the devices code, especially the console to work. In console.c : console_setfile() looks up the proper function pointers by using the syscalls table, console_init_r needs it also. You know the table is all of 11 longs. Rewriting the code to work differently would likely take up more space then using the table....And syscalls will show up. As far as the VFD goes. I have no problem undoing the move. I am nearly positive that its move would have any effect. My rational was it should be in the devices init, so putting it close was the next best thing to doing it correctly. Regards, Richard W. > -----Original Message----- > From: Wolfgang Denk [mailto:wd@denx.de] > Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 5:39 PM > To: Woodruff, Richard > Cc: u-boot-users(a)lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Enable device and console for ARM (II). > > > In message > <FD2AC9A020DDD51194710008C7089B20053D4C81(a)dlee17.itg.ti.com> > you wrote: > > > > Here is an updated patch against u-boot.0.3.0 with console_init_f > > defined. I added the call into what appears to be the proper place, > > into the init_sequence[], just like the PPC code does. > > Sorry, but I reject this patch for the same reasons I just > rejected the earlier version of this patch. > > Again: the code is OK, and I want to include it, but you do > a few things (VFD, syscalls) which you should leave as is. > > Please resubmit. > > > Best regards, > > Wolfgang Denk > > -- > Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux > Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88 Email: wd(a)denx.de > Every little picofarad has a nanohenry all its own. - Don Vonada >

2 1