[U-Boot] [PATCH] pxa: Fix typo in GCDR(x)
Fix a typo in the GCDR(x) macro. It's a good thing no one was using it.
Signed-off-by: David Hunter hunterd42@gmail.com --- include/asm-arm/arch-pxa/pxa-regs.h | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/asm-arm/arch-pxa/pxa-regs.h b/include/asm-arm/arch-pxa/pxa-regs.h index 2a723dc..f34af19 100644 --- a/include/asm-arm/arch-pxa/pxa-regs.h +++ b/include/asm-arm/arch-pxa/pxa-regs.h @@ -1217,7 +1217,7 @@ typedef void (*ExcpHndlr) (void) ; #define GCFER3 __REG(0x40E004AC) /* Clr Falling Edge Det. Enable[127:96] */
#define GSDR(x) __REG2(0x40E00400, ((x) & 0x60) >> 3) -#define GCDR(x) __REG2(0x40300420, ((x) & 0x60) >> 3) +#define GCDR(x) __REG2(0x40E00420, ((x) & 0x60) >> 3)
/* Multi-funktion Pin Registers, uncomplete, only: * - GPIO
On 14:32 Thu 30 Jul , David Hunter wrote:
Fix a typo in the GCDR(x) macro. It's a good thing no one was using it.
Signed-off-by: David Hunter hunterd42@gmail.com
include/asm-arm/arch-pxa/pxa-regs.h | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
applied to u-boot-arm
Best Regards, J.
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARDplagnioj@jcrosoft.com wrote:
applied to u-boot-arm
That raises a question. I'm porting U-Boot to our Marvell PXA310-based hardware. (I'm very new to contributing to an open source project using git, so I apologize in advance for the mistakes I'll make out of ignorance.) I have a few patches queued which will attempt to clean up and improve PXA300/310/320 support -- register definitions for now, but later driver stuff as I dive into Ethernet, etc.. Which branch should I be basing my work on: u-boot, -arm, or -pxa?
-Dave
On 12:15 Sat 01 Aug , David Hunter wrote:
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARDplagnioj@jcrosoft.com wrote:
applied to u-boot-arm
That raises a question. I'm porting U-Boot to our Marvell PXA310-based hardware. (I'm very new to contributing to an open source project using git, so I apologize in advance for the mistakes I'll make out of ignorance.) I have a few patches queued which will attempt to clean up and improve PXA300/310/320 support -- register definitions for now, but later driver stuff as I dive into Ethernet, etc.. Which branch should I be basing my work on: u-boot, -arm, or -pxa?
-arm
depenanding on the quantity of new code we may create a next branch
Best Regards, J.
Dear David Hunter,
In message d47469d30908011215k51f1ff58j47892a3e86c40a17@mail.gmail.com you wrote:
That raises a question. I'm porting U-Boot to our Marvell PXA310-based hardware. (I'm very new to contributing to an open source project using git, so I apologize in advance for the mistakes I'll make out of ignorance.) I have a few patches queued which will attempt to clean up
Please see http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/Patches for details.
and improve PXA300/310/320 support -- register definitions for now, but later driver stuff as I dive into Ethernet, etc.. Which branch should I be basing my work on: u-boot, -arm, or -pxa?
Normally please use the "master" branch of the mainline U-Boot git repository (git://git.denx.de/u-boot.git) as reference, unless (usually late in a release cycle) there has been an announcement to use the "next" branch of this repository instead.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
participants (3)
-
David Hunter -
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD -
Wolfgang Denk