From: Luka Perkov <uboot@lukaperkov.net>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2] add new board nas62x0
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 23:42:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120319224244.GA13300@w500.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201203191650.52310.marex@denx.de>
Hi Marek,
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 04:50:52PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > +#define IB62x0_OE_LOW (~(0))
> > > > +#define IB62x0_OE_HIGH (~(0))
> > >
> > > Fix this constant please (0xffffffff) and remove those parenthesis ...
> > > btw OE_HIGH and OE_LOW have both the same value?
> >
> > Are you sure? It's done this way in:
> >
> > board/Marvell/dreamplug/dreamplug.h
> > board/Marvell/sheevaplug/sheevaplug.h
> > board/Seagate/dockstar/dockstar.h
>
> Does that mean it's inherently correct and not just a duplicated bug?
Well I really dont know. Judging by your comments it looks like kirkwood
target could use some optimizations in "core" and not only in the board
code.
> > > > +#define CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT /* disable board lowlevel_init
> */
> > >
> > > Are you sure you want to skip lowlevel init? It'll break cache setup etc.
> > > I believe.
> >
> > I will retest and send v4 once I get your feedback on other items.
>
> Ok, what's the result? From IRC I take it you must define this ... why?
It generates error when building without it:
/home/luka/uboot/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/start.S:393: undefined reference to `lowlevel_init'
arm-openwrt-linux-ld: BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.22 assertion fail elf32-arm.c:13830
All other kirkwood targets I looked at define CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT,
including the ones mentioned above; here are their configs for
comparison:
include/configs/dreamplug.h
include/configs/sheevaplug.h
include/configs/dockstar.h
> > > > +#define CONFIG_MVSATA_IDE_USE_PORT0
> > > > +# ifdef CONFIG_BOARD_IS_IB_NAS6210
> > > > +# undef CONFIG_SYS_IDE_MAXBUS
> > > > +# define CONFIG_SYS_IDE_MAXBUS 1
> > > > +# undef CONFIG_SYS_IDE_MAXDEVICE
> > > > +# define CONFIG_SYS_IDE_MAXDEVICE 1
> > > > +# elif CONFIG_BOARD_IS_IB_NAS6220
> > > > +# define CONFIG_MVSATA_IDE_USE_PORT1
> > > > +# endif
> > > > +#define CONFIG_SYS_ATA_IDE0_OFFSET KW_SATA_PORT0_OFFSET
> > > > +# ifdef CONFIG_BOARD_IS_IB_NAS6220
> > > > +# define CONFIG_SYS_ATA_IDE1_OFFSET KW_SATA_PORT1_OFFSET
> > > > +# endif
> > > > +#endif /* CONFIG_CMD_IDE */
> > >
> > > please don't use this "#[space][space]define" convention.
> >
> > I must disagree here. This is more readable and there are many examples
> > in u-boot that use that syntax:
> >
> > $ egrep '#[ ]+define' * -r | wc -l
> > 12557
>
> Again, the fact that it's used doesn't mean it's correct. It's not more readable
> actually, it's readable in the same way given you have good editor. Also,
> doesn't checkpatch.pl caugh on this stuff ?
checkpatch.pl is ok with this. It's readable only if your editor uses
different colors for this, and I would not like to go into editor fight
here. I use vim probably as you but that is not important. I'll resend
v4 with this indentation unless Wolfgang has some objections.
If indentation is wrong in all other places in u-boot we can easily fix
that with some sed magic.
This is my proposal - I'll resend v4 and it should be ok to commit
without fixes for:
1) IB62x0_OE_LOW and IB62x0_OE_HIGH
2) CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT
3) ifdef indentation
Because fixing the 1) and 2) is more than adding support for this new
board, and if it was in the same patch I would need to separate it. That
is a different issue.
I'll put on my TODO list, and work on this after commit:
* replace tabs with spaces in boards.config
* look at IB62x0_OE_LOW and IB62x0_OE_HIGH issue
* look at CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT issue
If nobody has objections I'll resend v4...
Bye,
Luka
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-19 22:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-17 23:40 [U-Boot] [PATCH v2] add new board nas62x0 Luka Perkov
2012-03-17 23:43 ` Luka Perkov
2012-03-18 10:04 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-03-18 15:15 ` Marek Vasut
2012-03-18 18:31 ` Luka Perkov
2012-03-19 15:50 ` Marek Vasut
2012-03-19 22:42 ` Luka Perkov [this message]
2012-03-20 6:48 ` Marek Vasut
2012-03-21 0:34 ` Luka Perkov
2012-03-21 7:21 ` Marek Vasut
2012-03-21 9:51 ` Prafulla Wadaskar
2012-03-21 10:02 ` Marek Vasut
2012-03-21 10:15 ` Prafulla Wadaskar
2012-03-21 10:56 ` Marek Vasut
2012-03-21 12:01 ` Prafulla Wadaskar
2012-03-20 7:04 ` DrEagle
2012-03-20 8:21 ` Marek Vasut
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120319224244.GA13300@w500.lan \
--to=uboot@lukaperkov.net \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.