Hello Tom,
Am 29.10.2013 12:30, schrieb Heiko Schocher:
Hello Igor,
Am 29.10.2013 12:07, schrieb Igor Grinberg:
On 10/28/13 08:19, Heiko Schocher wrote:
Hello Igor,
Am 27.10.2013 08:30, schrieb Igor Grinberg:
Hi Heiko,
On 10/22/13 11:03, Heiko Schocher wrote:
- add omap24xx driver to new multibus/multiadpater support
- adapted all config files, which uses this driver
Tested on the am335x based siemens boards rut, dxr2 and pxm2 posted here: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/263211/
Signed-off-by: Heiko Schocherhs@denx.de Tested-by: Tom Rinitrini@ti.com Cc: Lars Poeschelpoeschel@lemonage.de Cc: Steve Sakomansakoman@gmail.com Cc: Thomas Weberweber@corscience.de Cc: Tom RixTom.Rix@windriver.com Cc: Grazvydas Ignotasnotasas@gmail.com Cc: Enric Balletbo i Serraeballetbo@iseebcn.com Cc: Luca Ceresoliluca.ceresoli@comelit.it Cc: Igor Grinberggrinberg@compulab.co.il Cc: Ilya Yanokyanok@emcraft.com Cc: Stefano Babicsbabic@denx.de Cc: Nishanth Menonnm@ti.com Cc: Pali Rohárpali.rohar@gmail.com Cc: Peter Baradapeter.barada@logicpd.com Cc: Nagendra T Snagendra@mistralsolutions.com Cc: Michael Jonesmichael.jones@matrix-vision.de Cc: Raphael Assenatraph@8d.com
[...]
[...]
diff --git a/board/compulab/cm_t35/eeprom.h b/board/compulab/cm_t35/eeprom.h index 02ffbb1..a07559d 100644 --- a/board/compulab/cm_t35/eeprom.h +++ b/board/compulab/cm_t35/eeprom.h @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ #ifndef _EEPROM_ #define _EEPROM_
-#ifdef CONFIG_DRIVER_OMAP34XX_I2C +#ifdef CONFIG_SYS_I2C_OMAP34XX int cm_t3x_eeprom_read_mac_addr(uchar *buf); u32 cm_t3x_eeprom_get_board_rev(void); #else
Please, rebase on top of: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/275284/ which should be applied any time soon.
Otherwise, Acked-by: Igor Grinberggrinberg@compulab.co.il
Hmm.. I cannot see, that your patch is accepted ... but I looked in it, and it looks good to me. So, I propose to add this patch to the i2c tree, so I do the necessary changes in my patch when applying it to the i2c tree (as they are trivial changes) ...
Well, I have no problem with that, but we need to take into account that there are several more patches (unrelated to i2c) on the mailing list waiting for approval/apply and depend on my series.
Ok.
@Tom: Is this OK for you?
I think, it would be better to apply my series to u-boot-ti and you can pull from it to the i2c tree?
Hmm.. u-boot-i2c is based on u-boot.git not on u-boot-ti, and I did not want to change this. I can of course rebase my patch against u-boot-ti when Tom added your patch to u-boot-ti and resend it, and tom pick up my patch ...
Tom, what do you think?
bye, Heiko