[U-Boot-Users] MC68360 Port

[U-Boot-Users] MC68360 Port

[Reinhard Meyer]

Hello,

has anyone ever thought about a port for the

<ducking down>
    MC68360 ?
</ducking down>

Although there is no use for booting LinuX there I like the features like
TFTP, good exploration possibilites of the hardware (md, imd, ports etc). I
think there is no need to limit U-Boot to LinuX-able processors only...

On that account, can anyone point me or send me a GNU toolchain for 68K? I
do not want to go through configuring AND compiling one myself if that is
avoidable.... ;)

Reinhard

[U-Boot-Users] MC68360 Port

[Keith Outwater]

Hi Reinhard - 
I used RTEMS with the 68360 with excellent results.  Ironically, getting
a bootloader running was the hardest part!

For a tool chain, perhaps you could use the RTEMS 68360 tool chain.  See
www.rtems.com.
BTW, there is a open source BDM interface design and a GDB driver for
the 68360 as well.

Regards,
Keith

Keith Outwater
Sr. Staff Engineer
Microvision, Inc.
19910 N. Creek Parkway
Bothell, WA 98011

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Reinhard Meyer [mailto:r.meyer at emk-elektronik.de]
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 12:47 PM
> To: U-boot
> Subject: [U-Boot-Users] MC68360 Port
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> has anyone ever thought about a port for the
> 
> <ducking down>
>     MC68360 ?
> </ducking down>
> 
> Although there is no use for booting LinuX there I like the 
> features like
> TFTP, good exploration possibilites of the hardware (md, imd, 
> ports etc). I
> think there is no need to limit U-Boot to LinuX-able 
> processors only...
> 
> On that account, can anyone point me or send me a GNU 
> toolchain for 68K? I
> do not want to go through configuring AND compiling one 
> myself if that is
> avoidable.... ;)
> 
> Reinhard
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of 
> TotalView, The debugger 
> for complex code. Debugging C/C++ programs can leave you 
> feeling lost and 
> disoriented. TotalView can help you find your way. Available 
> on major UNIX 
> and Linux platforms. Try it free. www.etnus.com
> _______________________________________________
> U-Boot-Users mailing list
> U-Boot-Users at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
> 

[U-Boot-Users] MC68360 Port

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Reinhard,

in message <01c401c2e427$88e01700$6d4ba8c0@alb.sub.de> you wrote:
> 
> has anyone ever thought about a port for the
> 
> <ducking down>

Why?

>     MC68360 ?

Yes, of course. Just waiting for a customer who asks for it.

> Although there is no use for booting LinuX there I like the features like
> TFTP, good exploration possibilites of the hardware (md, imd, ports etc). I
> think there is no need to limit U-Boot to LinuX-able processors only...

100% correct.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
Software Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87  Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88  Email: wd at denx.de
Repeat after me:
Usenet is not a word processor; it's a medium where aesthetics count.
Mozilla is not a newsreader; it's a web browser.
Windows is not an operating system; it's a GUI on a program loader.
         -- Tom Christiansen in <6bq0g5$lr4$2@csnews.cs.colorado.edu>

[U-Boot-Users] MC68360 port

[Matvejchikov Ilya]

Hi all,

I have ported U-Boot-1.1.6 to MC68360 based board. See the attached file for
details. E-mail me if you have any questions :)

Best regards,
Matvejchikov Ilya,
Russia, Moscow.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20061121/01ad3edd/attachment.htm 

[U-Boot-Users] MC68360 port

[Matvejchikov Ilya]

Hi all,

I have ported U-Boot-1.1.6 to MC68360 based board. See the attached
file for details. E-mail me if you have any questions :)

Best regards,
Matvejchikov Ilya,
Russia, Moscow.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: u-boot-1.1.6-mc68360.patch.gz
Type: application/x-gzip
Size: 28081 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20061121/353552d4/attachment.bin 

[U-Boot-Users] MC68360 port

[Stefan Roese]

On Tuesday 21 November 2006 07:48, Matvejchikov Ilya wrote:
> I have ported U-Boot-1.1.6 to MC68360 based board. See the attached
> file for details. E-mail me if you have any questions :)

Thanks.

Some comments:
- Are you sure that you can't use the common CFI FLASH driver?
- Please don't use C++ style comments.
- Use tabs for indentation (for example in board/mc68360/mc68360.c).
- Please rework your board config file. There is no comment at all
  so this is not readable.

Best regards,
Stefan

[U-Boot-Users] MC68360 port

[Matvejchikov Ilya]

2006/11/22, Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>:
> Some comments:
> - Are you sure that you can't use the common CFI FLASH driver?
No, I'am not sure about it. Is it so important?

> - Please don't use C++ style comments.
> - Use tabs for indentation (for example in board/mc68360/mc68360.c).
> - Please rework your board config file. There is no comment at all
>   so this is not readable.
ok

[U-Boot-Users] MC68360 port

[Stefan Roese]

On Thursday 23 November 2006 09:06, Matvejchikov Ilya wrote:
> 2006/11/22, Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>:
> > Some comments:
> > - Are you sure that you can't use the common CFI FLASH driver?
>
> No, I'am not sure about it. Is it so important?

Yes. Most of the board specific FLASH driver are error prone, since the code 
and it's error are copied over and over again. This is not maintainable. The 
CFI driver has a very broad test basis and is maintained quite good.

And a new board port with a board specific flash driver that is not needed, 
meaning when CFI compliant FLASH chips are used, will not be accepted 
anymore.

What FLASH chips are you using?

> > - Please don't use C++ style comments.
> > - Use tabs for indentation (for example in board/mc68360/mc68360.c).
> > - Please rework your board config file. There is no comment at all
> >   so this is not readable.
>
> ok

Thanks.

Best regards,
Stefan

[U-Boot-Users] MC68360 port

[Matvejchikov Ilya]

2006/11/23, Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>:
> On Thursday 23 November 2006 09:06, Matvejchikov Ilya wrote:
> > 2006/11/22, Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>:
> > > Some comments:
> > > - Are you sure that you can't use the common CFI FLASH driver?
> >
> > No, I'am not sure about it. Is it so important?
>
> Yes. Most of the board specific FLASH driver are error prone, since the code
> and it's error are copied over and over again. This is not maintainable. The
> CFI driver has a very broad test basis and is maintained quite good.

Right you are! It's the reverse of the 'copy-n-paste' method...

> And a new board port with a board specific flash driver that is not needed,
> meaning when CFI compliant FLASH chips are used, will not be accepted
> anymore.
>
> What FLASH chips are you using?

Unfortunately, we are use very old AMD flash chips - AM29F800BT. They
are not CFI compliant.

[U-Boot-Users] MC68360 port

[Stefan Roese]

On Saturday 25 November 2006 17:42, Matvejchikov Ilya wrote:
> > And a new board port with a board specific flash driver that is not
> > needed, meaning when CFI compliant FLASH chips are used, will not be
> > accepted anymore.
> >
> > What FLASH chips are you using?
>
> Unfortunately, we are use very old AMD flash chips - AM29F800BT. They
> are not CFI compliant.

Autsch. OK, that's a different story then.

Best regards,
Stefan

[U-Boot-Users] MC68360 port

[Tolunay Orkun]

Stefan Roese wrote:
> On Saturday 25 November 2006 17:42, Matvejchikov Ilya wrote:
>>> And a new board port with a board specific flash driver that is not
>>> needed, meaning when CFI compliant FLASH chips are used, will not be
>>> accepted anymore.
>>>
>>> What FLASH chips are you using?
>> Unfortunately, we are use very old AMD flash chips - AM29F800BT. They
>> are not CFI compliant.
> 
> Autsch. OK, that's a different story then.
> 
> Best regards,
> Stefan

Most of cfi_flash is probably usable for a non-cfi flash part.

The cfi detection etc. will not work but perhaps if we preset the 
interface settings from board configuration and do a jedec probe and 
setup some of the timing based on jedec probe we might be able to use 
the cfi flash driver for non-cfi flash as well. This should eliminate 
more custom board drivers. Someone else also was asking if cfi flash 
driver is able to handle a cfi flash and non-cfi flash at the same time. 
Perhaps we can handle that as well.

This week, I might be able to come up with such an extension patch. I do 
not have such an environment to test but with someone taking some time 
doing testing and providing feedback, I can manage to do this.

Best regards,
Tolunay

[U-Boot-Users] MC68360 port

[Tolunay Orkun]

(resending from correct address, please reply to this mail instead)

Stefan Roese wrote:
> On Saturday 25 November 2006 17:42, Matvejchikov Ilya wrote:
>>> And a new board port with a board specific flash driver that is not
>>> needed, meaning when CFI compliant FLASH chips are used, will not be
>>> accepted anymore.
>>>
>>> What FLASH chips are you using?
>> Unfortunately, we are use very old AMD flash chips - AM29F800BT. They
>> are not CFI compliant.
> 
> Autsch. OK, that's a different story then.
> 
> Best regards,
> Stefan

Most of cfi_flash is probably usable for a non-cfi flash part.

The cfi detection etc. will not work but perhaps if we preset the
interface settings from board configuration and do a jedec probe and
setup some of the timing based on jedec probe we might be able to use
the cfi flash driver for non-cfi flash as well. This should eliminate
more custom board drivers. Someone else also was asking if cfi flash
driver is able to handle a cfi flash and non-cfi flash at the same time.
Perhaps we can handle that as well.

This week, I might be able to come up with such an extension patch. I do
not have such an environment to test but with someone taking some time
doing testing and providing feedback, I can manage to do this.

Best regards,
Tolunay

[U-Boot-Users] MC68360 port

[Stefan Roese]

Hi Tolunay,

On Sunday 26 November 2006 07:19, Tolunay Orkun wrote:
> >> Unfortunately, we are use very old AMD flash chips - AM29F800BT. They
> >> are not CFI compliant.
> >
> > Autsch. OK, that's a different story then.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Stefan
>
> Most of cfi_flash is probably usable for a non-cfi flash part.

Yes, I though about this option too.

> The cfi detection etc. will not work but perhaps if we preset the
> interface settings from board configuration and do a jedec probe and
> setup some of the timing based on jedec probe we might be able to use
> the cfi flash driver for non-cfi flash as well. This should eliminate
> more custom board drivers. Someone else also was asking if cfi flash
> driver is able to handle a cfi flash and non-cfi flash at the same time.
> Perhaps we can handle that as well.

Good idea.

> This week, I might be able to come up with such an extension patch. I do
> not have such an environment to test but with someone taking some time
> doing testing and providing feedback, I can manage to do this.

This patch would be very welcome. I have to admit, that my time is very 
limited in the next few weeks. So hopefully someone else has a board and the 
time to do the testing. Any volunteers? Perhaps Ilya with the AM29F800BT for 
a start?

Best regards,
Stefan

[U-Boot-Users] MC68360 port

[Matvejchikov Ilya]

2006/11/26, Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>:
> > Most of cfi_flash is probably usable for a non-cfi flash part.
>
> Yes, I though about this option too.
>
> > The cfi detection etc. will not work but perhaps if we preset the
> > interface settings from board configuration and do a jedec probe and
> > setup some of the timing based on jedec probe we might be able to use
> > the cfi flash driver for non-cfi flash as well. This should eliminate
> > more custom board drivers. Someone else also was asking if cfi flash
> > driver is able to handle a cfi flash and non-cfi flash at the same time.
> > Perhaps we can handle that as well.
>
> Good idea.
>

Yes, It would be a nice thing to do.

> > This week, I might be able to come up with such an extension patch. I do
> > not have such an environment to test but with someone taking some time
> > doing testing and providing feedback, I can manage to do this.
>
> This patch would be very welcome. I have to admit, that my time is very
> limited in the next few weeks. So hopefully someone else has a board and the
> time to do the testing. Any volunteers? Perhaps Ilya with the AM29F800BT for
> a start?

I'll be happy to help you. Just give me the patch and some time :)