Dear Andre Schwarz,
In message 1302786707-15359-5-git-send-email-andre.schwarz@matrix-vision.de you wrote:
Signed-off-by: Andre Schwarz andre.schwarz@matrix-vision.de
There is a ton ot checkpatch warnings and errors. Please ix these.
...
+int fpga_config_fn(int assert, int flush, int cookie) +{
- volatile immap_t *im = (immap_t *)CONFIG_SYS_IMMR;
- volatile gpio83xx_t *gpio = (gpio83xx_t *)&im->gpio[0];
- u32 dvo = gpio->dat;
- dvo &= ~FPGA_CONFIG;
- gpio->dat = dvo;
- udelay(5);
- dvo |= FPGA_CONFIG;
- gpio->dat = dvo;
NAK. Please get rid of the "volatile" and use I/O accessors. Please fix globally.
...
+#if defined(CONFIG_SYS_DRAM_TEST) +int testdram(void) +{
- uint *pstart = (uint *) CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_START;
- uint *pend = (uint *) CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_END;
- uint *p;
- printf("Testing DRAM from 0x%08x to 0x%08x\n",
CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_START, CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_END);- printf("DRAM test phase 1:\n");
- for (p = pstart; p < pend; p++)
*p = 0xaaaaaaaa;- for (p = pstart; p < pend; p++) {
if (*p != 0xaaaaaaaa) {printf("DRAM test fails at: %08x\n", (uint) p);return 1;}- }
- printf("DRAM test phase 2:\n");
- for (p = pstart; p < pend; p++)
*p = 0x55555555;- for (p = pstart; p < pend; p++) {
if (*p != 0x55555555) {printf("DRAM test fails at: %08x\n", (uint) p);return 1;}- }
- printf("DRAM test passed.\n");
- return 0;
+} +#endif
Do you _really_ have to implement yet another version of a memory test (and not even a good one). Why cannot you use one of the existing ones instead?
+phys_size_t initdram(int board_type) +{
- u32 msize;
- volatile immap_t *immr = (immap_t *)CONFIG_SYS_IMMR;
- volatile clk83xx_t *clk = (clk83xx_t *)&immr->clk;
- /* Enable PCI_CLK[0:1] */
- clk->occr |= 0xc0000000;
- udelay(2000);
+#if defined(CONFIG_SPD_EEPROM)
- msize = spd_sdram();
+#else
- immap_t *im = (immap_t *) CONFIG_SYS_IMMR;
- u32 msize_log2;
NAK. We don't allow variable declarations in the middle of the code.
- return msize << 20;
Is there any specific reason for not using get_ram_size() ?
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk