From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: zoldnap at freemail.hu <zoldnap@freemail.hu>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 01:27:15 +0000
Subject: [U-Boot-Users] dataflash problem
In-Reply-To: <20051009213620.GB24243@vap.homelinux.net>
References: <1128898703.23326.7.camel@localhost>
	 <20051009213620.GB24243@vap.homelinux.net>
Message-ID: <1128907635.31053.5.camel@localhost>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Hi,

thank you for your answer!

in the last few hours I've managed to track down that the error is not
in
the address range checking, but in at45.c : AT91F_DataFlashRead
function.
Within that, the AT91F_DataFlashWaitReady function is timeouting
resulting that cmd_mem.c:do_mem_cmd continues execution at line 167,
where it attemts to read non-existing memory..

I dont really know why is this timeout occuring, since I've written
some codes which run natively (without Linux) on the board, and I
can access the DataFlash without problems.

regards,
Zoli

> Absence of NAND flash uncovers an issue with flash address
> ranges checking.
> The problem can be bypassed with either of two methods:
> 
> First: hack address ranges checking in common/flash.c:
> 
> --- u-boot-1.1.3/common/flash.c	2005-08-14 03:53:35.000000000 +0400
> +++ u-boot-1.1.3-new/common/flash.c	2005-09-15 01:15:58.000000000 +0400
> @@ -105,6 +105,8 @@
>  	int i;
>  
>  	for (i=0, info=&flash_info[0]; i<CFG_MAX_FLASH_BANKS; ++i, ++info) {
> +		if (info->size == 0)
> +			continue;
>  		if (info->flash_id != FLASH_UNKNOWN &&
>  		    addr >= info->start[0] &&
>  		    /* WARNING - The '- 1' is needed if the flash
> 
> 
> Second: disable NAND flash by setting CFG_MAX_FLASH_BANKS to 0 in board
> config.
> 
> I'm not sure it is right solution, but it at least looks as working
> for me :)
> 
-- 
zoldnap at freemail.hu <zoldnap@freemail.hu>