January 2006 - U-Boot

[U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 00/04] Add OF Flat Dev Tree to MPC85xx ADS and CDS
by Jon Loeliger 17 Jan '06

17 Jan '06

This series of four patches adds basic support for building the MPC85xx ADS and CDS boards with Open Firmware Flat Device tree. These patches should be applied in numerical order, and require previous patches released by Kumar Gala. The patches apply directly to the U-Boot tree on kernel.org as it already has the required predecessor patches applied to it.

1 0

[U-Boot-Users] Bug in cpu/arm920t/imx/interrupts.c ?
by llandre 17 Jan '06

17 Jan '06

I have a doubt about the function ulong get_timer (ulong base) imlemented in cpu/arm920t/imx/interrupts.c. In my undertanding this function should return return (get_timer_masked () - base); instead of return get_timer_masked (); Am I right? -- llandre DAVE Electronics System House - R&D Department web: http://www.dave-tech.it email: r&d2(a)dave-tech.it

1 0

[U-Boot-Users] u-boot runs from flash/relocates to RAM
by Shakthi Kannan 17 Jan '06

17 Jan '06

Greetings! Board: ARM Versatile ARM926EJ-S u-boot: 1.1.2 I would like to know if u-boot continues to run straight from NOR flash, or does it get transferred to SDRAM after clock, memory controller initialization, stack setup etc. Thanks, SK -- Shakthi Kannan, MS Software Engineer, Hexaware Technologies [E]: shakthimaan(a)yahoo.com [M]: (91) 98407-87007 [W]: http://www.shakthimaan.com [L]: Chennai, India __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

2 1

[U-Boot-Users] Flash driver : help req
by batsayan.das＠tcs.com 17 Jan '06

17 Jan '06

Hi, Our MPC8260 based customs board's flash configuration is as follows Flash Bank Base Address Make Number of flashes per chip size Total size CS0 0xFE000000 M29W040B 2 0.5MB 1MB CS1 0xFE800000 AM29LV160BB 2 2MB 4MB My question is 1. Is is mandatory that CS0 and CS1 to be contiguous? 2. what should be the value of CFG_MAX_FLASH_BANKS? 2 or 4? 3. If for a board, CS0 has "n1" number of flash chips connected and CS1 has "n2" number of flash chips connected, then what will be the suggested structure of flash driver? I found that flash drivers for different board does not consider the number of physical flash chips present in a board. 4.Is there any reference board which has multiple flash chips connected both to CS0 and CS1? Thanks, Batsayan Das Notice: The information contained in this e-mail message and/or attachments to it may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, use, review, distribution, printing or copying of the information contained in this e-mail message and/or attachments to it are strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by reply e-mail or telephone and immediately and permanently delete the message and any attachments. Thank you

2 1

[U-Boot-Users] Bug fix on cmd_nand.c
by chaidy＠lenovo.com 16 Jan '06

16 Jan '06

Hello, Wolfgang! I found two bugs in common/cmd_nand.c when debugging nand flash, which is from u-boot-1.1.4 and the same with git tree: 1. there are 3 places using "not exact" or "wrong" parameters in strncmp() function. strncmp(cmdtail, ".oob", 2) ==> strncmp(cmdtail, ".oob", 4) strncmp(cmdtail, ".jffs2", 2) ==> strncmp(cmdtail, ".jffs2", 6) strncmp(cmdtail, ".jffs2s", 2) ==> strncmp(cmdtail, ".jffs2s", 7) 2. "nand read.jffs2" command will bypass "nand read.jffs2s" command for the else-if branch. FYI, the attachment is a diff patch with "-purN" options. Best regards, Dongyan Chai

1 0

[U-Boot-Users] Execution problem in MIPS based...
by Suresh KV 16 Jan '06

16 Jan '06

Hi, I am trying to add some POST tests in the uboot for MIPS 32 based board.Asthe number of tests increases i face some problems.The uboot strucks at some point.I am using the cmdline options to execute each tests.If i add eg some 5 tests it works fine.If i add one more then the processor hangs.I am including some c files from outside.All the tests works fine individually in uboot using command line option.If i build with all the tests, one or the other makes the system hang. I tried to debug and the statement causing the Rom Exception is 8003CAC8 0x3C1C0003 lui $gp,0x0003 in the begining of one of the functions. Please give me some pointers Is there any size limitation to uboot? Thanks in advance, Suresh

2 3

RE: [U-Boot-Users] network driver link error
by Xuezhang Dong 14 Jan '06

14 Jan '06

Thanks. You are absolutely right, after doing #define CONFIG_COMMANDS = ( CONFIG_CMD_DFL & ~CFG_CMD_NET ) Now I can compile it without any network driver. Thanks again for your help. Regards. Xuezhang. -----Original Message----- From: u-boot-users-admin(a)lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:u-boot-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf Of Wolfgang Denk Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 3:50 PM To: Xuezhang Dong Cc: u-boot-users(a)lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] network driver link error In message <54AD0F12E08D1541B826BE97C98F99F11C2B06(a)NT-SJCA-0751.brcm.ad.broadcom.co m> you wrote: > > My question is that if I donot include some network driver in, I > cannot pass the compilation. U-BOOT works fine, just a little bigger > than it Your question was understood, and answered. > supports to be. I just thought there must be a nice way to compile it > without any network driver. Yes, of course. Just don't enable any network support (no network drivers, no network commands). Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd(a)denx.de Commitment, n.: Commitment can be illustrated by a breakfast of ham and eggs. The chicken was involved, the pig was committed. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idv37&alloc_id865&op=ick _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users(a)lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users

1 0

RE: [U-Boot-Users] network driver link error
by Xuezhang Dong 14 Jan '06

14 Jan '06

Thanks for the quick reply and sorry for the HTML format again, my stupid outlook change the format setting after I reboot the machine! My question is that if I donot include some network driver in, I cannot pass the compilation. U-BOOT works fine, just a little bigger than it supports to be. I just thought there must be a nice way to compile it without any network driver. Thanks. Xuezhang. -----Original Message----- From: wd(a)denx.de [mailto:wd@denx.de] Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 3:08 PM To: Xuezhang Dong Cc: u-boot-users(a)lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] network driver link error In message <54AD0F12E08D1541B826BE97C98F99F11C2AEA(a)NT-SJCA-0751.brcm.ad.broadcom.co m> you wrote: > > without any trouble now). So I want to understand that is it the > mandatory to have network support? or I can disable the support of > network by using some flag? It is not mandatory to have network support. You don't have to disable it. If you don't want it, just don't *enable* it. > ------_=_NextPart_001_01C61889.B399C59C > Content-Type: text/html; > charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> This must be Make-Wolfgang-Really-Angry-Day. STOP POSTING HTML to this list. STOP IT. Wolfgang Denk -- Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd(a)denx.de This is an unauthorized cybernetic announcement.

2 1

[U-Boot-Users] ENV_IS_EMBEDDED functionality
by J. William Campbell 14 Jan '06

14 Jan '06

Hello Mr. Denk, I have a question regarding the functionality provided by ENV_IS_EMBEDDED. Currently, this value is computed only for the case CFG_ENV_IS_IN_FLASH defined in environment.h, and is based on the flash addresses of the environment being defined as inside the executing addresses of u-boot. This seems to be designed for the case where u-boot is executed out of flash and not copied into ram for execution. There is an old configuration variable, CFG_ENV_IS_EMBEDDED, that appears to be non-functional and deprecated. I am working with u-boot for the Analog Devices Blackfin chip, which has not yet been submitted to mainstream (AFAIK). The code directly defines ENV_IS_EMBEDDED to force that functionality even though it is copied to ram for execution (and thereby making the embedded determination in environment.h false). The linker script is fixed up to force the environment data onto a flash sector boundary, so everything works. It does however mean that u-boot cannot be updated without destroying the old environment data. This approach is also used for a serial flash on the spi bus using the env_eeprom module and CFG_ENV_IS_IN_EEPROM. Normally ENV_IS_EMBEDDED could not be defined in this case. My question is: What is your opinion of this approach? It seems to me that this makes ENV_IS_EMBEDDED a configuration parameter (again), which provides some (useful?) functionality but may not be what you envision. If ENV_IS_EMBEDDED is a configuration option, the name should be changed to include CFG, shouldn't it? The main advantages I see of allowing this are 1) CFG_ENV_OFFSET is fixed forever, u-boot growth will never collide with it. 2) Some flash space can be saved because the sector alignment of the environment data can be optimized as opposed to tacking it onto the end (which may waste almost an entire flash sector). Is this worth another configuration parameter? I do not want to go too far down this road if it will not be acceptable to you in any case. Thank you for your attention! Best Regards, Bill Campbell

2 3

Re: [U-Boot-Users] Re: Problem with the cfi flash driver with ax8/x16 flash configuredinx8 mode.
by Tolunay Orkun 14 Jan '06

14 Jan '06

Alex BASTOS wrote: > > I think, at the end, it will be Wolfgang or Tolunay Orkun > who will choose. Not me. It is Wolfgang that decides what is acceptable. I might have argued my position a bit more passionately in the past as well regarding some changes but I do not have any such decision making capability here. I have interest in this peace of code because we use it and I have submitted some patches and studied the code probably a little more closely than others. I am all for someone picking up all the pending patches and merging in. I wish I could do this but I really do not have time at this time. I guess this is true for most of us nowadays. I am looking at "cfi_testing" branch proposal from Wolfgang as a medium to incorporate all the pending patches and resolve the merge conflicts between various patches before we can sync back to the mainline. Since a lot of people are now dependent on these patches (as evidenced by frequency of questions regarding cfi_flash.c driver on the list) there is a lot of good to come if we merge these "somewhere" and after a testing period of say 1 month if everyone is happy (and especially Wolfgang) we can merge back to mainline hopefully before next release of U-Boot. Wolfgang what do you think? Best regards, Tolunay

2 1