2008/10/24 Wolfgang Denk wd@denx.de:
Dear Alan,
In message 37367b3a0810231758y5a3ad19do42e40fbf5128f0@mail.gmail.com you wrote:
Last time Scott Wood suggested to use nand_spl you replied "I think using nand_spl is the best approach, but it will needs more effort to complete." and "Anyway, right now we can have iMX31PDK booting with this code as an option for users willing to use U-Boot in this board." So, what's the status of this effort? If this your new submission, which still doesn't use nand_spl is not really targeted for upstream merge, I think, it would be better not to mark these mails "PATCH". Or have I missed anything?
This patch is just a rebase of previous patch, to be merged on u-boot-arm/master repository.
It will not be merged to arm/master ...
I don't have nand_spl working until now.
...because we are waiting for nand_spl code.
I am new sending patches to u-boot mailing list. So what is the problem when calling it of "PATCH"? Please, let me know about my mistake, can you explain about it?
The problem is that we told you we will only add code that fits intop the existing framework, i. e. nand_spl
Where can one find developer documentation for nand_spl? Also, is there any ARM board supporting this already?
The nand_spl for the i.MX31 has to fit within 2048 bytes, along with some of the usual low_levelinit.S stuff.
/Magnus