testing-board branch: rebase to RMK's devel-stable?

testing-board branch: rebase to RMK's devel-stable?

[Kevin Hilman]

Hi Tony,

Your testing-board branch currently has a couple new boards that are
missing the boot_params to atag_offset conversion (patch below.)

There's a patch below to fix this, but maybe it's better to just rebase
your testing-board branch onto Russell's devel-stable branch (where he's
merged the seris from Nico) so any board stuff we add is sure to do it
correctly.

Kevin


>From 4c5699a5feb1a037e1ae3147ca7d7e9fe3eb62c1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 11:00:12 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] OMAP: convert new boards to atag_offset

These boards were added after the bulk converson from boot_params to
atag_offset (queued for v3.2.)  Fix them up.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
---
 arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap3encore.c |    2 +-
 arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap4pcm049.c |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap3encore.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap3encore.c
index eb70fe1..07ed8ab 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap3encore.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap3encore.c
@@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ static void __init omap_encore_init(void)
 }
 
 MACHINE_START(ENCORE, "encore")
-	.boot_params	= 0x80000100,
+	.atag_offset	= 0x100,
 	.reserve	= omap_reserve,
 	.map_io		= omap3_map_io,
 	.init_early	= omap_encore_init_early,
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap4pcm049.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap4pcm049.c
index d889110..260f2cb 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap4pcm049.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap4pcm049.c
@@ -578,7 +578,7 @@ static void __init pcm049_map_io(void)
 
 MACHINE_START(PCM049, "phyCORE OMAP4")
 	/* Maintainer: Jan Weitzel - Phytec Messtechnik GmbH */
-	.boot_params	= 0x80000100,
+	.atag_offset	= 0x100,
 	.reserve	= omap_reserve,
 	.map_io		= pcm049_map_io,
 	.init_early	= pcm049_init_early,
-- 
1.7.6

Re: testing-board branch: rebase to RMK's devel-stable?

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, Kevin Hilman wrote:

> Hi Tony,
> 
> Your testing-board branch currently has a couple new boards that are
> missing the boot_params to atag_offset conversion (patch below.)
> 
> There's a patch below to fix this, but maybe it's better to just rebase
> your testing-board branch onto Russell's devel-stable branch (where he's
> merged the seris from Nico) so any board stuff we add is sure to do it
> correctly.

I would suggest that too.


Nicolas

Re: testing-board branch: rebase to RMK's devel-stable?

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, Nicolas Pitre wrote:

> On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> 
> > Hi Tony,
> > 
> > Your testing-board branch currently has a couple new boards that are
> > missing the boot_params to atag_offset conversion (patch below.)
> > 
> > There's a patch below to fix this, but maybe it's better to just rebase
> > your testing-board branch onto Russell's devel-stable branch (where he's
> > merged the seris from Nico) so any board stuff we add is sure to do it
> > correctly.
> 
> I would suggest that too.

Better yet, if your bootloader does pass the address of the ATAG list 
via r2 already (contemporary u-Boot versions do) then the 
boot_params/atag_offset entry is redundant and can simply be dropped 
upfront.


Nicolas

Re: testing-board branch: rebase to RMK's devel-stable?

[Tony Lindgren]

* Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org> [110902 11:25]:
> On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Tony,
> > > 
> > > Your testing-board branch currently has a couple new boards that are
> > > missing the boot_params to atag_offset conversion (patch below.)
> > > 
> > > There's a patch below to fix this, but maybe it's better to just rebase
> > > your testing-board branch onto Russell's devel-stable branch (where he's
> > > merged the seris from Nico) so any board stuff we add is sure to do it
> > > correctly.
> > 
> > I would suggest that too.
> 
> Better yet, if your bootloader does pass the address of the ATAG list 
> via r2 already (contemporary u-Boot versions do) then the 
> boot_params/atag_offset entry is redundant and can simply be dropped 
> upfront.

Yes we should be able to drop it then.

Tony