[U-Boot-Users] MPC885
Oops, I immediately apologize for having neglected to include the subject line last time. My bad!
-----Original Message----- From: u-boot-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:u-boot-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net] Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 2:30 PM To: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [U-Boot-Users] (no subject)
Is anyone starting work on 885 support? We have an 885 board coming up very soon, so I will be happy to help out.
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id%1470&alloc_id638&op=ick _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
Kerl, John wrote:
Is anyone starting work on 885 support? We have an 885 board coming up very soon, so I will be happy to help out.
What do you mean starting ;) ?
My latest patch for our two new boards are based on a 885/875. See boards/netphone, boards/netta.
Regards
Pantelis
Hello,
I'm porting U-Boot 1.1.0 to a board which has a 512-Bytes EEPROM. So, I set the define CFG_I2C_EEPROM_ADDR_LEN to 2, to support the 16-bit addresses. But the EEPROM doesn't worked fine, I can't even read or write it. If I set this define to 1, the EEPROM works properly (but only the first 256 bytes).
So, my question is: it's necessary set another define/flag to user EEPROMs larger than 256 bytes?
Thanks in advance,
Bruno
______________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - O melhor e-mail do Brasil! Abra sua conta agora: http://br.yahoo.com/info/mail.html
In message 20040423135125.79058.qmail@web61309.mail.yahoo.com you wrote:
I'm porting U-Boot 1.1.0 to a board which has a 512-Bytes EEPROM. So, I set the define CFG_I2C_EEPROM_ADDR_LEN to 2, to support the 16-bit addresses. But the EEPROM doesn't worked fine, I can't even read or write it. If I set this define to 1, the EEPROM works properly (but only the first 256 bytes).
So, my question is: it's necessary set another define/flag to user EEPROMs larger than 256 bytes?
Yes.
Ummm.. Did you have a look at the README?
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
participants (4)
-
Bruno -
Kerl, John -
Pantelis Antoniou -
Wolfgang Denk