Part 3

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 6:07 PM, Ricardo ricardo.ribalda@gmail.com wrote:

Part 2

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 6:06 PM, Ricardo ricardo.ribalda@gmail.com wrote:

...

Hi List:

This is my first contribution to u-boot. I have ported u-boot to the ML507 Board by Xilinx. http://www.xilinx.com/products/devkits/HW-V5-ML507-UNI-G.htm

This boards includes an FPGA Virtex 5 FX with an embedded PowerPC 440.

The port supports: -Virtex 5 ppc440x5 -XIlinx Interrupt Controller -Xilinx I2C Controller (Interrupted mode) -Xilinx Uart Lite (simple port) -Xilinx LL_TEMA (Interrupted and SGDMA) -Save environment on board eeprom -DTT support for the ADT sensor on board (new hwmon driver) -Dummy I2C driver (for testing purposes)

This patch works against the last commit to the p4xx branch.

I am a researcher of the Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, and this work has been supported by Q-Technology ( http://qtec.com ) under a Research Agreement.

Any comment will be very welcomed.

PS: I have divided the patch in four parts for the mailing list

Ricardo Ribalda http://www.eps.uam.es/~rribalda/

-- Ricardo Ribalda http://www.eps.uam.es/~rribalda/

In message aa76a2be0807100907q689ea6b8o17ecd67dbaadd1bd@mail.gmail.com you wrote:

And Part 4

Could you please explain why the subject says part 1, and the message body says part 4 ?

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

In message aa76a2be0807101125k318f21bet187325afd4dca898@mail.gmail.com you wrote:

I wanted the four parts to have the same subject, to easy the

But this makes no sense, especiall when you add "1/4" to the subject.

handling of the files. The first submition was 4 .bz2 dependent files... But later on the evening I have prepared 8 different INdependent patches following the guidelines on the u-boot site. Sorry

The guidelines say:

... Separate _logical changes_ into a single patch file.

... No MIME, no links, no compression, no attachments. Just plain text.

... The canonical patch subject line is:

Subject: [PATCH 001/123] subsystem: summary phrase ...

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

Dear Ricardo,

in message aa76a2be0807101219s4946b744h2ca925f1e9c7dbf8@mail.gmail.com you wrote:

Sorry to hear that. I have tried to give all my best and follow the style of the ml300 board, which was the closest board to mine. On FPGAs board I think that it is not a horrible idea to follow this style. Maybe you should consider to create an FPGA branch, where the generic drivers could be accepted. As I said, the FPGA hardware

Believe me, this makes no sense. Copying the same files around quickly results in an unmaintainable mess. Adding lots of code which are not actually needed just prevent anybody from actually understanding which code is essential and which not.

We've been there before, and we learned this lesson.

changes a lot and support a so changing hardware will be very difficult... Or just should not support FPGAs and its IP devices...

I do not think that FPGA have any inherent problems. The issue is with the base code which was not written with a boot loader (or portability and efficiency) in mind.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

Hi Ricardo,

Hi Michael

Sorry to hear that. I have tried to give all my best and follow the style of the ml300 board, which was the closest board to mine. On FPGAs board I think that it is not a horrible idea to follow this style. Maybe you should consider to create an FPGA branch, where the generic drivers could be accepted. As I said, the FPGA hardware changes a lot and support a so changing hardware will be very difficult... Or just should not support FPGAs and its IP devices...

Any FPGA branch is not acceptable in U-BOOT mainline. Mainline U-BOOT is only one. If you want to add your changes to U-BOOT mainline you have to change your design style.

By the way:

patches 1 2 and 6 follow the guidelines and don't add any generic driver patches 8 (except xparameters.h) follow the guidelines patch 6 could be redesined. You should be aware that driver/serial/serial_xuartlite.c does not compile for ppc440 without that patch

This should be truth but without compatible board doesn't make sense to me. You use any numbers but I haven't seen these numbers anywhere. Please use git for your work and use more generic subject of your email. In set of patches you use conventional style which generate git. Add there at the begging ml507 or xilinx or whatever what will be specify xilinx relate topic.

Michal

Best regards

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 9:04 PM, Michal Simek Monstr@seznam.cz wrote:

...

Hi Ricardo,

I read your patches in your weird style. These style of patches never go to mainline. You use xilinx generated files which is currently use only with ml300. For example look at your xparameters.h there are a lot of values which are not used. If you want to add ml507 to mainline U-BOOT you have to change completely handling style of xilinx board for ppc. In next U-BOOT release I will clean ancient ml300. I want to remove a lot of xilinx generic files.

100% NACK for these patches.

The size of patches is due to your incorrect design strategy.

Michal Simek

Hi List:

This is my first contribution to u-boot. I have ported u-boot to the ML507 Board by Xilinx. http://www.xilinx.com/products/devkits/HW-V5-ML507-UNI-G.htm

This boards includes an FPGA Virtex 5 FX with an embedded PowerPC 440.

The port supports: -Virtex 5 ppc440x5 -XIlinx Interrupt Controller -Xilinx I2C Controller (Interrupted mode) -Xilinx Uart Lite (simple port) -Xilinx LL_TEMA (Interrupted and SGDMA) -Save environment on board eeprom -DTT support for the ADT sensor on board (new hwmon driver) -Dummy I2C driver (for testing purposes)

This patch works against the last commit to the p4xx branch.

I am a researcher of the Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, and this work has been supported by Q-Technology ( http://qtec.com ) under a Research Agreement.

Any comment will be very welcomed.

PS: I have divided the patch in four parts for the mailing list

Ricardo Ribalda http://www.eps.uam.es/~rribalda/