On 30/03/2012 18:05, Marek Vasut wrote:
I am testing Anatolij's patch on mx35pdk.
TFTP from server 192.168.2.14; our IP address is 192.168.2.97 Filename 'mx35pdk/uImage'. Load address: 0x80800000 Loading: Misaligned cache operation [8fe726e8, 8fe72728]
However, data is correctly loaded. I will check mmc on the "flea" board.
You get this from FEC?
Yes, I must set explicitely ethact=FEC, because on the mx35pdk ethprime is set to SMC911.
Will have to recheck, this is weird, will recheck once I get back to my m28.
I will check also on the flea3 board later.
It's a good thing this stirred a wave of response including patches. We now know very well which boards are maintained ;-)
Also, once any such breaking patch lands into mainline, we'll know in _less_than_24_hours_ that something got broken. (this is handled by DENX CI machine).
Well, this is a good thing - my worries are about that patches for imx were already merged, and
Finally, we can't really run physical (HW) tests indeed, but did we ever run physical tests with each and every patch?
Not every patch, but a patchset that can have influence on several SOCs, yes.
Agreed.
(and to conclude this -- these patches were tested on M28 and MX6Q-board)
mmmh...I suppose the following patches must be merged, too (I had merged into u-boot-next, really):
Author: Eric Nelson eric.nelson@boundarydevices.com Date: Sun Mar 4 11:47:37 2012 +0000
i.MX6: define CACHELINE_SIZEand also even if not mandatory: commit 1b2150b0770d8d019a41993d8692e4a29bf70a9e Author: Eric Nelson eric.nelson@boundarydevices.com Date: Sun Mar 4 11:47:38 2012 +0000
i.MX6: implement enable_caches() disabled by default until drivers are fixed Signed-off-by: Eric Nelson <eric.nelson@boundarydevices.com> Acked-by: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>They weren't already? Hm.
They are not - I thought to push all patches together, and for this reason they are on the -next branch. I merge both into -master, and they will part of my next pull.
Best regards, Stefano Babic