Dear Wolfgang,
2009/11/24 Wolfgang Denk wd@denx.de:
Dear Minkyu Kang,
In message 1f3430fb0911222304pa45554epc7e46c49a9cc70f7@mail.gmail.com you wrote:
In some case, saved address and compared address are different. (e.g: 80M) So, it can be get wrong memory size.
Well, could you please explain what "some cases" are, and how exactly the code is failing for you? And especially, what "80M" has to do with it?
If memory size is 80M, cnt is decrease 0xa00000 -> 0x500000 -> 0x280000 ... 0xa -> 0x5 -> 0x2 -> 0x1 when first for loop (line 49 to 55). So, save[2] is ~0x5. And second for loop(line 77 to 91), cnt is increase 0x1 -> 0x2 -> 0x4 -> 0x8 ... 0x1000000 -> 0x2000000 ... So, will be compare ~0x5 and ~0x4. That is problem.
I guess you are aware that the code silently assumes that the size of any memory bank is always a power of two, aren't you? So a size of "80M" does not make any sense to me. If you have such a memory configuration, it is most probably assembled from two separate memory banks (64 + 16 MB), which of course need to be sized independently.
No, we use 1Gb OneDRAM, 80M is used by AP, 32M is used by CP and 16M is shared area. As you mentioned, size of memory bank is always a power of two, but, size of "available" memory is not always a power of two.
This patch fix the such problem, and fix style problems also.
...
Any comments?
Frankly, I don't understand which problem you're trying to fix, nor what your fix is supposed to be, nor your changes.
My patch is fixing wrong address comparison.
I don't want to imply that your patch is bad, but I don't understand it.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
-- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de Pig: An animal (Porcus omnivorous) closely allied to the human race by the splendor and vivacity of its appetite, which, however, is in- ferior in scope, for it balks at pig. - Ambrose Bierce
Thanks Minkyu Kang