[U-Boot-Users] CLI over Ethernet
Hi all,
Greetings. There is a requirement to provide CLI over Ethernet in uboot.
1) The CLI works over LAN (not using TCP/IP) using Logical link control Layer. (Is this possible?)
2) Anyone who has done a similar stuff has any advice for us? (Not in negative :-)) 3) Is there any documentation or RFC available which talks of (Ethernet) connectivity at LLC layer?
Thanks and Best Regards, C.R.Srivatsan
-----Original Message----- From: u-boot-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:u-boot-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf Of u-boot-users-request@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 8:43 PM To: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: U-Boot-Users digest, Vol 1 #1106 - 13 msgs
Send U-Boot-Users mailing list submissions to u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to u-boot-users-request@lists.sourceforge.net
You can reach the person managing the list at u-boot-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of U-Boot-Users digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. RE: CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Friedrich, Lars) 2. question on drive (zhonglei) 3. boot problem (Alessio Raccis) 4. Re: question on drive (Marc Leeman) 5. boot problem (Alessio Raccis) 6. R: [U-Boot-Users] CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Paolo Broggini) 7. Re: CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Wolfgang Denk) 8. Re: boot problem (Wolfgang Denk) 9. Re: question on drive (Wolfgang Denk) 10. Re: question on drive (Marc Leeman) 11. RE: CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Paugam Luc) 12. Re: CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Steven Scholz) 13. Re: CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Wolfgang Denk)
--__--__--
Message: 1 Subject: RE: [U-Boot-Users] CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 08:46:45 +0100 From: "Friedrich, Lars" lars.friedrich@wago.com To: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Why is that so bad? It makes it possible to debug U-Boot with just loading the image into RAM using BDI2000.
Which is an unsupported mode of operation which works for a handfull of experts and causes confusion with many, many newbees.
How do these lines of code confuse a newbie more than any other code in the file?
But how would you debug U-Boot?
As I always do. Attach the BDI, burn to flash, start in GDB.
There are 53982 other hardware debuggers out there and only the minority (is there actually one besides the BDI?) support the burn to flash feature you rely on. So if you need to start U-Boot to flash U-Boot, you either do those few lines of code to skip the relocation or get/use another piece of actually redundant software to get the image on the flash. I don't know why the latter should save me time.
You can do this if you know exactly what you're doing,
Isn't this what is assumed here anyway?
Best regards, Lars Friedrich
--=20
--__--__--
Message: 2 Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:25:07 +0800 From: "zhonglei" zhonglei@RCS-9000.COM Reply-To: zhonglei@RCS-9000.COM To: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [U-Boot-Users] question on drive
hi Sorry for bothering you! But would you please give me a hand.When I insert a Intel Pro/100s server Adapter into the PCI slot on Lite5200(motorola MPC5200 development kit) and start the kernel,the kernel run into a dead lock. The reports are as follows:
. . . IP-Config: Retrying forever (NFS root)... eth1: config: auto-negotiation on, 100FDX, 100HDX, 10FDX, 10HDX. eth1: Waiting for the link to be up... eth1: status: link up, 100 Mbps Full Duplex, auto-negotiation complete. e100: eth0 NIC Link is Up 100 Mbps Full duplex Sending DHCP requests ...... timed out! Please tell me how can I handle it! Thanks in advance! Best Regards zhonglei
--__--__--
Message: 3 From: "Alessio Raccis" lolloz@tiscali.it To: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:10:39 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] boot problem
Hi all,
I have a problem and now, it's weird to say, I pray to a kernel panic !
I'm working on smdk2410 and I have a u-boot version modified to boot from smartmedia. I want, or better I hope to boot 2.6.7 linux kernel. So, I create a zImage by compiling kernel and then I make:
gzip -9 zImage ./mkimage -A arm -O linux -T kernel -C gzip -a 0x30008000 -e 0x30008000 -n "Linux Kernel Image" -d zImage.gz uimage
At this point, I download uimage at 33000000 address from a tftp server.
SMDK2410 # tftpboot 33000000 uimage
TFTP from server 10.124.7.161; our IP address is 10.124.7.50
Filename 'uimage'.
Load address: 0x33000000
Loading: #################################################################
#################################################################
########################################################
done
Bytes transferred = 950519 (e80f7 hex)
Now I boot the kernel and I have:
SMDK2410 # bootm
## Booting image at 33000000 ...
Image Name: Linux Kernel Image
Created: 2004-11-17 13:50:56 UTC
Image Type: ARM Linux Kernel Image (gzip compressed)
Data Size: 950455 Bytes = 928.2 kB
Load Address: 30008000
Entry Point: 30008000
Verifying Checksum ... OK
Uncompressing Kernel Image ... OK
Starting kernel ...
Uncompressing Linux................................................................... done, booting the kernel.
Nothing else !! Can anyone help me, please ? Which is my mistake ?
thanks in advance.
Best regards,
Alex
--__--__--
Message: 4 Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:14:33 +0100 From: Marc Leeman marc.leeman@gmail.com Reply-To: Marc Leeman marc.leeman@gmail.com To: zhonglei@rcs-9000.com Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] question on drive Cc: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net
I don't think this has to do with u-boot :) I think you should send this to the correct mailing list.
IP-Config: Retrying forever (NFS root)... eth1: config: auto-negotiation on, 100FDX, 100HDX, 10FDX, 10HDX. eth1: Waiting for the link to be up... eth1: status: link up, 100 Mbps Full Duplex, auto-negotiation
complete.
e100: eth0 NIC Link is Up 100 Mbps Full duplex
Maybe your board configuration of the kernel is not quite correct and/or some interrupt lines are wongly addressed.
Sending DHCP requests ...... timed out! Please tell me how can I handle it! Thanks in advance!
$ find . -name '*.c' | xargs grep Sending\ DHCP And start debugging/instrumenting from there.
--=20 ash nazg durbatul=FBk, ash nazg gimbatul, ash nazg thrakatul=FBk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul
--__--__--
Message: 5 From: "Alessio Raccis" lolloz@tiscali.it To: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [U-Boot-Users] boot problem Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:18:22 +0100
Hi all,
I have a problem and now, it's weird to say, I pray to a kernel panic !
I'm working on smdk2410 and I have a u-boot version modified to boot from smartmedia. I want, or better I hope to boot 2.6.7 linux kernel. So, I create a zImage by compiling kernel and then I make:
gzip -9 zImage ./mkimage -A arm -O linux -T kernel -C gzip -a 0x30008000 -e 0x30008000 -n "Linux Kernel Image" -d zImage.gz uimage
At this point, I download uimage at 33000000 address from a tftp server.
SMDK2410 # tftpboot 33000000 uimage
TFTP from server 10.124.7.161; our IP address is 10.124.7.50
Filename 'uimage'.
Load address: 0x33000000
Loading: #################################################################
#################################################################
########################################################
done
Bytes transferred = 950519 (e80f7 hex)
Now I boot the kernel and I have:
SMDK2410 # bootm
## Booting image at 33000000 ...
Image Name: Linux Kernel Image
Created: 2004-11-17 13:50:56 UTC
Image Type: ARM Linux Kernel Image (gzip compressed)
Data Size: 950455 Bytes = 928.2 kB
Load Address: 30008000
Entry Point: 30008000
Verifying Checksum ... OK
Uncompressing Kernel Image ... OK
Starting kernel ...
Uncompressing Linux................................................................... done, booting the kernel.
Nothing else !! Can anyone help me, please ? Which is my mistake ?
thanks in advance.
Best regards,
Alex
--__--__--
Message: 6 From: "Paolo Broggini" pbroggini@softool.ch To: "Friedrich, Lars" lars.friedrich@wago.com, u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: R: [U-Boot-Users] CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:29:52 +0100
-----Messaggio originale----- Da: u-boot-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:u-boot-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net]Per conto di
Friedrich,
Lars Inviato: mercoledì, 24. novembre 2004 08:47 A: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net Oggetto: RE: [U-Boot-Users] CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200
Why is that so bad? It makes it possible to debug U-Boot with just loading the image into RAM using BDI2000.
Which is an unsupported mode of operation which works for a handfull of experts and causes confusion with many, many newbees.
How do these lines of code confuse a newbie more than any other code in the file?
You can do this if you know exactly what you're doing,
Isn't this what is assumed here anyway?
I fully agree with you !!!
Regards -Paolo Broggini
Best regards, Lars Friedrich
--
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real
users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
--__--__--
Message: 7 To: "Friedrich, Lars" lars.friedrich@wago.com Cc: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net From: Wolfgang Denk wd@denx.de Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 11:26:56 +0100
Dear Lars,
in message AB4979EC12A5EB419810807434495A17283C1E@svex01001.wago.local you wrote:
Which is an unsupported mode of operation which works for a handfull of experts and causes confusion with many, many newbees.
How do these lines of code confuse a newbie more than any other code in the file?
It's not the lines of code, but the mode of operation. People tend to underestimate the complexity of the task and the impact of the required modifications.
As I always do. Attach the BDI, burn to flash, start in GDB.
There are 53982 other hardware debuggers out there and only the minority (is there actually one besides the BDI?) support the burn to flash feature you rely on. So if you need to start U-Boot
C'me on. You must be joking. Please name a few commercial debuggers which do not support flash programming. Maybe we should add a list of such broken devices to our wiki so people can avoid them?
Let me check:
* Abatron BDI2000: ok (of course) * Windriver visionICE II: ok * Lauterbach Trace32: ok * Macraigor Wiggler / Raven / usbDemon: ok * Agilent 3070 Series etc: ok
Even the free BDM4GDB project suports flash programming.
Please be specific: which BDM/JTAG debugger cannot program flash? I really would like to know to be able to warn our customers.
You can do this if you know exactly what you're doing,
Isn't this what is assumed here anyway?
Yes. People should think, machines should work ;-)
There are areas, where small errors have small consequences which are easy to spot. AQnd there are really nasty problems. If you look back at the archives you will see that this is one of these nasty problem domains. And it's a FAQ.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
Hi Srivatsan,
Greetings. There is a requirement to provide CLI over Ethernet inuboot.
Really? There is a requirement? Anyway, check doc/README.NetConsole.
1) The CLI works over LAN (not using TCP/IP) using Logical linkcontrol Layer. (Is this possible?)
It actually works over UDP.
2) Anyone who has done a similar stuff has any advice for us? (Notin negative :-))
I guess everything is in place - just use it.
3) Is there any documentation or RFC available which talks of(Ethernet) connectivity at LLC layer?
Thanks and Best Regards, C.R.Srivatsan
-----Original Message----- From: u-boot-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:u-boot-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf Of u-boot-users-request@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 8:43 PM To: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: U-Boot-Users digest, Vol 1 #1106 - 13 msgs
Send U-Boot-Users mailing list submissions to u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to u-boot-users-request@lists.sourceforge.net
You can reach the person managing the list at u-boot-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of U-Boot-Users digest..."
Today's Topics:
- RE: CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Friedrich, Lars)
- question on drive (zhonglei)
- boot problem (Alessio Raccis)
- Re: question on drive (Marc Leeman)
- boot problem (Alessio Raccis)
- R: [U-Boot-Users] CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Paolo
Broggini) 7. Re: CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Wolfgang Denk) 8. Re: boot problem (Wolfgang Denk) 9. Re: question on drive (Wolfgang Denk) 10. Re: question on drive (Marc Leeman) 11. RE: CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Paugam Luc) 12. Re: CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Steven Scholz) 13. Re: CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Wolfgang Denk)
[...]
Do you really think it neccessary to include the _whole digest mail_ in a question introducing a new thread? Please think about that in the future, even if it takes a few more keystrokes.
Cheers Detlev
Hi all,
Thanks for the reply Mr.Detlev Zundel.
There is indeed a requirement to have CLI over Ethernet using LLC. I wanted to know the best mechanism to provide CLI over Ethernet (Whether it is through UDP or through LLC). If it uses UDP then uboot already provides me with one alternatively if it uses LLC then it has to be rewritten.
If any one has tried out CLI over Ethernet using LLC or if anyone has done a study on LLC, then please share your experiences with me.
I have one question to the uboot's design team, why was UDP chosen for CLI on Ethernet?
With Thanks and Best Regards, C.R.Srivatsan
-----Original Message----- From: Detlev Zundel [mailto:dzu@denx.de] Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 10:22 PM To: Srivatsan Cc: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] CLI over Ethernet
Hi Srivatsan,
Greetings. There is a requirement to provide CLI over Ethernet inuboot.
Really? There is a requirement? Anyway, check doc/README.NetConsole.
1) The CLI works over LAN (not using TCP/IP) using Logical linkcontrol Layer. (Is this possible?)
It actually works over UDP.
2) Anyone who has done a similar stuff has any advice for us? (Notin negative :-))
I guess everything is in place - just use it.
3) Is there any documentation or RFC available which talks of(Ethernet) connectivity at LLC layer?
Thanks and Best Regards, C.R.Srivatsan
-----Original Message----- From: u-boot-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:u-boot-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf Of u-boot-users-request@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 8:43 PM To: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: U-Boot-Users digest, Vol 1 #1106 - 13 msgs
Send U-Boot-Users mailing list submissions to u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to u-boot-users-request@lists.sourceforge.net
You can reach the person managing the list at u-boot-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of U-Boot-Users digest..."
Today's Topics:
- RE: CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Friedrich, Lars)
- question on drive (zhonglei)
- boot problem (Alessio Raccis)
- Re: question on drive (Marc Leeman)
- boot problem (Alessio Raccis)
- R: [U-Boot-Users] CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Paolo
Broggini) 7. Re: CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Wolfgang Denk) 8. Re: boot problem (Wolfgang Denk) 9. Re: question on drive (Wolfgang Denk) 10. Re: question on drive (Marc Leeman) 11. RE: CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Paugam Luc) 12. Re: CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Steven Scholz) 13. Re: CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 (Wolfgang Denk)
[...]
************************************************************************ ****
Do you really think it neccessary to include the _whole digest mail_ in a question introducing a new thread? Please think about that in the future, even if it takes a few more keystrokes.
Cheers Detlev
Dear C.R.Srivatsan,
in message 002901c4d5d0$c1447720$4501a8c0@bgcw301 you wrote:
There is indeed a requirement to have CLI over Ethernet using LLC. I
This may be a requirement for you, but please understand that it is a non-requirement for U-Boot.
wanted to know the best mechanism to provide CLI over Ethernet (Whether it is through UDP or through LLC). If it uses UDP then uboot already provides me with one alternatively if it uses LLC then it has to be rewritten.
I'm not sure if you actually mean what you say and how you say it, or maybe it's my limited understanding of the English language which makes me feel somewhat angry: this is free software, and instead of being thankful for finding a powerful tool for free yoiu come up with semi-mandatory staments like "there is a requirement" or "it has to be rewritten." I would not like this tone if I was your subordinate, which I definitely am not.
This is a free software poroject, so if you want to see it extended you can either cointribute yourself by submitting patches, or you can hire someone to implement what you want, but please do not expect that everybody on this list starts hacking just because you feel you have a requirement.
I have one question to the uboot's design team, why was UDP chosenfor CLI on Ethernet?
Why not? UDP is a common standard protocol. You can use existing standard tools to receive and send UDP messages (see netcat). Most of all, this way the implementation is compatible to the netconsole implementation used by Linux, so we have a standard console protocol for both U-Boot and Linux.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
Hi all.
May be I have been got wrong. Please excuse me for that. I have been a member for this group for about a month and I have also seen the mail transactions. I must say I know for sure that It's not for requirements alone that this group is being used and also no one is subordinate to anyone in any open source(leave alone uboot) mailing list.
Also I haven't asked for particular CLI (requirement with LLC) to be developed and given to me. What I have asked is the advantage of having CLI over Ethernet using LLC?
Had I mentioned requirement for the group or the code has to rewritten by uboot group which I know is ethically wrong then I would have made a mistake. But I just required all your help to give me a head start with the available resources for my problem.
This group is not for showing emotions.
With Best Regards, C.R.Srivatsan
----Original Message----- From: wd@denx.de [mailto:wd@denx.de] Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 1:57 PM To: Srivatsan Cc: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] CLI over Ethernet
Dear C.R.Srivatsan,
in message 002901c4d5d0$c1447720$4501a8c0@bgcw301 you wrote:
There is indeed a requirement to have CLI over Ethernet using LLC.
I
This may be a requirement for you, but please understand that it is a non-requirement for U-Boot.
wanted to know the best mechanism to provide CLI over Ethernet
(Whether
it is through UDP or through LLC). If it uses UDP then uboot already provides me with one alternatively if it uses LLC then it has to be rewritten.
I'm not sure if you actually mean what you say and how you say it, or maybe it's my limited understanding of the English language which makes me feel somewhat angry: this is free software, and instead of being thankful for finding a powerful tool for free yoiu come up with semi-mandatory staments like "there is a requirement" or "it has to be rewritten." I would not like this tone if I was your subordinate, which I definitely am not.
This is a free software poroject, so if you want to see it extended you can either cointribute yourself by submitting patches, or you can hire someone to implement what you want, but please do not expect that everybody on this list starts hacking just because you feel you have a requirement.
I have one question to the uboot's design team, why was UDP chosenfor CLI on Ethernet?
Why not? UDP is a common standard protocol. You can use existing standard tools to receive and send UDP messages (see netcat). Most of all, this way the implementation is compatible to the netconsole implementation used by Linux, so we have a standard console protocol for both U-Boot and Linux.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
Hi Srivatsan,
Had I mentioned requirement for the group or the code has to rewritten by uboot group which I know is ethically wrong then I would have made a mistake. But I just required all your help to give me a head start with the available resources for my problem.
Don't worry - It was simply kind of amusing that you told us "there is a requirement to support ...." without the "in our project" part that I expected. Lets get back to (hopefully) solid facts.
Also I haven't asked for particular CLI (requirement with LLC) to be developed and given to me. What I have asked is the advantage of having CLI over Ethernet using LLC?
This is an interesting question and probably you have an answer for us? Reading up on LLC I am not really sure what a CLI implementation would give us - despite the need for a completely separate set of tools to work with this protocol. Using UDP (belonging to the IP family) we can simply use the heapload of utilities available - especially "netcat" comes to mind.
The netconsole support was written with this in mind to support (as Wolfgang said) a seamless networking console for the U-Boot / Linux combination. The Linux netconsole support predates the netconsole in U-Boot so it was clear that we would go for compatibility with this implementation.
This group is not for showing emotions.
[complete quote snipped]
It is also not for posting complete quotes. Please try to understand that it is a waste of bandwidth and of our time to include these completely useless text parts. I can always look up the old mails if I want to see these bits - E-Mail can be very efficient so please try to use it in this spirirt - even if this entails the 15 minutes it takes to read the netiquette.
Cheers Detlev
Hi all,
Thanks for the active support everyone has provided me with.
We are trying to use Uboot on MPC8280. In our case Serial port, eventhough it is available, can't be used for CLI / as a console port for dumping uboot's log messages.
The next alternative is Ethernet. I had downloaded uboot ver 1.1.1 but I am not able to find Readme.Netconsole in the doc directory. Does uboot 1.1.1 provide support for Netconsole? Are there any patches available for uboot to run Netconsole?
Also we have a requirement to put log messages on Ethernet (on uboot also). These messages must be put very early, even before the IP comes up. Is our requirement possible by using the current uboot as is or do we have to modify the uboot code for the changes?
A trivial issue, 1) I went thro uboot.sourceforge.net, there was uboot ver1.0 only present(activity percentile was 51.2%) 2) I went to the sourceforge site thro denx.de site and got uboot, the version shown is uboot1.1.1.(activity percentile 98.3%)
Why is this difference? What is the latest version of uboot released and where can I get it?
Thanks for all your understanding, C.R.Srivatsan
********************************DISCLAIMER**********************************
This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege of Deccanet Designs Ltd. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from retaining, using, copying, altering or disclosing the contents of this message.
****************************************************************************
In message 000e01c4e807$fc2ed800$4501a8c0@bgcw301 you wrote:
The next alternative is Ethernet. I had downloaded uboot ver 1.1.1 but I am not able to find Readme.Netconsole in the doc directory. Does uboot 1.1.1 provide support for Netconsole? Are there any patches available
As you already found out it does not contain this feature.
for uboot to run Netconsole?
No, ther eare no patches. There is a current version (top of CVS) which includes this so no patches are needed.
Also we have a requirement to put log messages on Ethernet (on uboot also). These messages must be put very early, even before the IP comes
What exactly do you mean "before the IP comes up"?
up. Is our requirement possible by using the current uboot as is or do we have to modify the uboot code for the changes?
You have to explain what you want to do in such a way that we can understand it.
A trivial issue,
- I went thro uboot.sourceforge.net, there was uboot ver1.0 only
The page reads: "Crunched and crypted init procedure to protect linux server." This is something else - a completely different project unrelated to "Das U-Boot".
- I went to the sourceforge site thro denx.de site and got uboot, the
version shown is uboot1.1.1.(activity percentile 98.3%)
Why is this difference? What is the latest version of uboot released and where can I get it?
These are two completely different projects. If you actually READ a bit on the web pages you jump to you might learn the difference.
The last officially released version of U-Boot can be found on the web page at SF: it's U-Boot-1.1.1; the current development verion (1.1.2) is available on the CVS server at SF.
And all of this is information is available by reading a bit on the SF web page and in the mailing list archives.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
Thanks for the reply Mr.Wolfgang.
Correct me if I am wrong.
Our requirement is such that uboot should print (debug) messages while it is coming up. I do think that the present uboot is doing that but our requirement is that it must do so on Ethernet console instead of Serial port. Finally the CLI must start on the Ethernet.
With Best Regards, C.R.Srivatsan
-----Original Message----- From: wd@denx.de [mailto:wd@denx.de] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 4:36 PM To: Srivatsan Cc: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] Uboot Netconsole support
In message 000e01c4e807$fc2ed800$4501a8c0@bgcw301 you wrote:
The next alternative is Ethernet. I had downloaded uboot ver 1.1.1 but
I
am not able to find Readme.Netconsole in the doc directory. Does uboot 1.1.1 provide support for Netconsole? Are there any patches available
As you already found out it does not contain this feature.
for uboot to run Netconsole?
No, ther eare no patches. There is a current version (top of CVS) which includes this so no patches are needed.
Also we have a requirement to put log messages on Ethernet (on uboot also). These messages must be put very early, even before the IP comes
What exactly do you mean "before the IP comes up"?
up. Is our requirement possible by using the current uboot as is or do we have to modify the uboot code for the changes?
You have to explain what you want to do in such a way that we can understand it.
A trivial issue,
- I went thro uboot.sourceforge.net, there was uboot ver1.0 only
The page reads: "Crunched and crypted init procedure to protect linux server." This is something else - a completely different project unrelated to "Das U-Boot".
- I went to the sourceforge site thro denx.de site and got uboot, the
version shown is uboot1.1.1.(activity percentile 98.3%)
Why is this difference? What is the latest version of uboot released
and
where can I get it?
These are two completely different projects. If you actually READ a bit on the web pages you jump to you might learn the difference.
The last officially released version of U-Boot can be found on the web page at SF: it's U-Boot-1.1.1; the current development verion (1.1.2) is available on the CVS server at SF.
And all of this is information is available by reading a bit on the SF web page and in the mailing list archives.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
In message 000d01c4e823$3fc8cc40$4501a8c0@bgcw301 you wrote:
Correct me if I am wrong.
I will.
Our requirement is such that uboot should print (debug) messages while it is coming up. I do think that the present uboot is doing that but our requirement is that it must do so on Ethernet console instead of Serial port. Finally the CLI must start on the Ethernet.
I'm sorry, but I cannot comment on your requirements. How could I know if your description gives a correct representation of your requirements?
I can only answer questions about U-Boot, and I don't see any question here. Also, I don't see any indication that you read the documentation, which is a prerequisite _before_ posting.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
participants (3)
-
Detlev Zundel -
Srivatsan -
Wolfgang Denk