Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM AT91 new board EB+CPUx9K2

Dear Wolfgang Denk

Dear Jens Scharsig,

This is close. Of course we should drop the AT91_REG and use standard types instead, and "PIO_OER" is not a logal variable name either because it's all-capitals. So this entry should rather look like this:

... u32 pio_oer; ...

...

and

#define AT91C_BASE_PIOC ((AT91PS_PIO) 0xFFFFF800)

This is definitely deprecated.

...

So the access should be

AT91PS_PIO pioa = AT91C_BASE_PIOA; ... writel(AT91C_PA23_TXD2, &pioa->PIO_OER);

Yes, except for the incorrect variable name.

By the way, the AT91RM9200.h. has hundreds of style problems. This requires a complete revision of the AT91RM9200.h. I can try this, but will take a while and I can't test other RM9200 boards.

Best regards,

Jens Scharsig