[U-Boot] at91sam9263_nandflash build issues

[U-Boot] at91sam9263_nandflash build issues

[Marek Vasut]

The problem is clear from this IRC log, where "vickylinuxer" described his grief 
(so I included the log, the board really doesn't build). I also did a quick and 
dirty patch (follows the log, it might give you an idea where it breaks, but 
it's a mess -- not all is relevant and it probably breaks it even more).

Cheers

//-------- LOG ---------

05:01 < vickylinuxer> guys i am making u-boot for at91sam9263 with ubifs 
support...which u-boot version i can prefer...
05:02 < vickylinuxer> because u-boot-12-2010 gave so many compilation 
problems...
05:06 < Marex> vickylinuxer: look ... what's the problem ? what board did you 
config it for ?
05:06 < Marex> vickylinuxer: give me the exact xyz for xyz_config
05:10 < vickylinuxer> at91sam9263_nandflash
05:11 < vickylinuxer> atmel board
05:11 < Marex> compiling, checking ... please wait
05:12 < Marex> I see
05:12 < Marex> vickylinuxer: it'll take a bit to fix it all ... wanna tinker with 
it and assist in fixing ?
05:38 < vickylinuxer> yes marex  i want to update from  ver 2010.09 to 
2010.12..but 09 is working good...
05:39 < vickylinuxer> but when compiling uboot-12 i m getting sdram error and so 
on...
05:51 < Marex> vickylinuxer: ok well ... there seems to be more breakage than I 
expected
05:57 < Marex> vickylinuxer: try this http://pastebin.com/2Rq92nNg

//-------- DIFF ---------

diff --git a/config.mk b/config.mk
index 5147c35..fe1d40c 100644
--- a/config.mk
+++ b/config.mk
@@ -261,7 +261,7 @@ $(obj)%.s:  %.c
 
 # If the list of objects to link is empty, just create an empty built-in.o
 cmd_link_o_target = $(if $(strip $1),\
-                     $(LD) $(LDFLAGS) -r -o $@ $1,\
+                     $(LD) -r -o $@ $1,\
                      rm -f $@; $(AR) rcs $@ )
 
 #########################################################################
diff --git a/drivers/serial/atmel_usart.c b/drivers/serial/atmel_usart.c
index bfa1f3a..1cc8bc0 100644
--- a/drivers/serial/atmel_usart.c
+++ b/drivers/serial/atmel_usart.c
@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
 
 #include <asm/io.h>
 #include <asm/arch/clk.h>
+#include <asm/arch/hardware.h>
 #include <asm/arch/memory-map.h>
 
 #if defined(CONFIG_USART0)
diff --git a/drivers/spi/atmel_dataflash_spi.c b/drivers/spi/atmel_dataflash_spi.c
index 4a5c4aa..d5215c0 100644
--- a/drivers/spi/atmel_dataflash_spi.c
+++ b/drivers/spi/atmel_dataflash_spi.c
@@ -158,12 +158,12 @@ unsigned int AT91F_SpiWrite(AT91PS_DataflashDesc pDesc)
        }
 
        /* arm simple, non interrupt dependent timer */
-       reset_timer_masked();
+       reset_timer();
        timeout = 0;
 
        writel(AT91_SPI_TXTEN + AT91_SPI_RXTEN, AT91_BASE_SPI + AT91_SPI_PTCR);
        while (!(readl(AT91_BASE_SPI + AT91_SPI_SR) & AT91_SPI_RXBUFF) &&
-               ((timeout = get_timer_masked()) < CONFIG_SYS_SPI_WRITE_TOUT));
+               ((timeout = get_timer(0)) < CONFIG_SYS_SPI_WRITE_TOUT));
        writel(AT91_SPI_TXTDIS + AT91_SPI_RXTDIS, AT91_BASE_SPI + 
AT91_SPI_PTCR);
        pDesc->state = IDLE;
 
diff --git a/include/configs/at91sam9263ek.h b/include/configs/at91sam9263ek.h
index f6cb406..3db8bd0 100644
--- a/include/configs/at91sam9263ek.h
+++ b/include/configs/at91sam9263ek.h
@@ -27,6 +27,9 @@
 #ifndef __CONFIG_H
 #define __CONFIG_H
 
+#define CONFIG_AT91_LEGACY
+#define        CONFIG_AT91FAMILY
+
 /* ARM asynchronous clock */
 #define CONFIG_SYS_AT91_MAIN_CLOCK     16367660        /* 16.367 MHz crystal */
 #define CONFIG_SYS_HZ          1000
@@ -341,6 +344,10 @@
  */
 #define CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_LEN          ROUND(3 * CONFIG_ENV_SIZE + 128*1024, 
0x1000)
 
+#define CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE  PHYS_SDRAM
+#define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR        (CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE + 0x1000 - \
+                               GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE)
+
 #define CONFIG_STACKSIZE       (32*1024)       /* regular stack */
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_USE_IRQ

[U-Boot] at91sam9263_nandflash build issues

[Reinhard Meyer]

Dear Marek Vasut,

> The problem is clear from this IRC log, where "vickylinuxer" described his grief 
> (so I included the log, the board really doesn't build). I also did a quick and 
> dirty patch (follows the log, it might give you an idea where it breaks, but 
> it's a mess -- not all is relevant and it probably breaks it even more).

All ATMEL AT91 boards except for AT91SAM9260ek (which I fixed) boards are currently broken.
People are working towards bringing the others in-line again, but that will take time.

> diff --git a/drivers/serial/atmel_usart.c b/drivers/serial/atmel_usart.c
> index bfa1f3a..1cc8bc0 100644
> --- a/drivers/serial/atmel_usart.c
> +++ b/drivers/serial/atmel_usart.c
> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
>  
>  #include <asm/io.h>
>  #include <asm/arch/clk.h>
> +#include <asm/arch/hardware.h>
>  #include <asm/arch/memory-map.h>

Things like that are fixed at u-boot-atmel.git/rework101228...

> diff --git a/drivers/spi/atmel_dataflash_spi.c b/drivers/spi/atmel_dataflash_spi.c
> index 4a5c4aa..d5215c0 100644
> --- a/drivers/spi/atmel_dataflash_spi.c
> +++ b/drivers/spi/atmel_dataflash_spi.c
> @@ -158,12 +158,12 @@ unsigned int AT91F_SpiWrite(AT91PS_DataflashDesc pDesc)
>         }
>  
>         /* arm simple, non interrupt dependent timer */
> -       reset_timer_masked();
> +       reset_timer();

NO. reset_timer() is not acceptable anymore. A fix is already in the list, I just need
some time to handle it all:)

> diff --git a/include/configs/at91sam9263ek.h b/include/configs/at91sam9263ek.h
> index f6cb406..3db8bd0 100644
> --- a/include/configs/at91sam9263ek.h
> +++ b/include/configs/at91sam9263ek.h
> @@ -27,6 +27,9 @@
>  #ifndef __CONFIG_H
>  #define __CONFIG_H
>  
> +#define CONFIG_AT91_LEGACY

There should be no need for LEGACY anymore.

I have project deadlines I must meet first, then I will handle all accumulated AT91 patches.

Best Regards,
Reinhard

[U-Boot] AT91: dataflash: was at91sam9263_nandflash build issues

[Reinhard Meyer]

Just noticed that the subject was wrong!

[U-Boot] at91sam9263_nandflash build issues

[Marek Vasut]

On Wednesday 02 February 2011 09:16:46 Reinhard Meyer wrote:
> Dear Marek Vasut,
> 

Hi,

> > The problem is clear from this IRC log, where "vickylinuxer" described
> > his grief (so I included the log, the board really doesn't build). I
> > also did a quick and dirty patch (follows the log, it might give you an
> > idea where it breaks, but it's a mess -- not all is relevant and it
> > probably breaks it even more).
> 
> All ATMEL AT91 boards except for AT91SAM9260ek (which I fixed) boards are
> currently broken. People are working towards bringing the others in-line
> again, but that will take time.

All right. No need to worry, we all are busy :)
> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/serial/atmel_usart.c b/drivers/serial/atmel_usart.c
> > index bfa1f3a..1cc8bc0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/serial/atmel_usart.c
> > +++ b/drivers/serial/atmel_usart.c
> > @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
> > 
> >  #include <asm/io.h>
> >  #include <asm/arch/clk.h>
> > 
> > +#include <asm/arch/hardware.h>
> > 
> >  #include <asm/arch/memory-map.h>
> 
> Things like that are fixed at u-boot-atmel.git/rework101228...

Ok, good to know.

> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/spi/atmel_dataflash_spi.c
> > b/drivers/spi/atmel_dataflash_spi.c index 4a5c4aa..d5215c0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/spi/atmel_dataflash_spi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/spi/atmel_dataflash_spi.c
> > @@ -158,12 +158,12 @@ unsigned int AT91F_SpiWrite(AT91PS_DataflashDesc
> > pDesc)
> > 
> >         }
> >         
> >         /* arm simple, non interrupt dependent timer */
> > 
> > -       reset_timer_masked();
> > +       reset_timer();
> 
> NO. reset_timer() is not acceptable anymore. A fix is already in the list,
> I just need some time to handle it all:)

Ok, it was just a very quick thing with no thinking involved.

> 
> > diff --git a/include/configs/at91sam9263ek.h
> > b/include/configs/at91sam9263ek.h index f6cb406..3db8bd0 100644
> > --- a/include/configs/at91sam9263ek.h
> > +++ b/include/configs/at91sam9263ek.h
> > @@ -27,6 +27,9 @@
> > 
> >  #ifndef __CONFIG_H
> >  #define __CONFIG_H
> > 
> > +#define CONFIG_AT91_LEGACY
> 
> There should be no need for LEGACY anymore.
> 
> I have project deadlines I must meet first, then I will handle all
> accumulated AT91 patches.

Ok, as I don't have any AT91 hardware, I can't help anymore :)

Cheers

> 
> Best Regards,
> Reinhard

[U-Boot] at91sam9263_nandflash build issues

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Marek Vasut,

In message <201102020849.36451.marek.vasut@gmail.com> you wrote:
> The problem is clear from this IRC log, where "vickylinuxer" described his grief 
> (so I included the log, the board really doesn't build). I also did a quick and 
> dirty patch (follows the log, it might give you an idea where it breaks, but 
> it's a mess -- not all is relevant and it probably breaks it even more).

What exactly is it that you want?

Contact the board maintainer ?  Then why did you not put him on Cc: ?

Contact the responsible custodian ? Then why did you not put him on Cc: ?

Submit a fix ? Then why did you not follow the patch submission rules?

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
Of course there's no reason for it, it's just our policy.

[U-Boot] at91sam9263_nandflash build issues

[Scott Wood]

On Wed, 2 Feb 2011 08:49:36 +0100
Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> wrote:

> diff --git a/config.mk b/config.mk
> index 5147c35..fe1d40c 100644
> --- a/config.mk
> +++ b/config.mk
> @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@ $(obj)%.s:  %.c
>  
>  # If the list of objects to link is empty, just create an empty built-in.o
>  cmd_link_o_target = $(if $(strip $1),\
> -                     $(LD) $(LDFLAGS) -r -o $@ $1,\
> +                     $(LD) -r -o $@ $1,\
>                       rm -f $@; $(AR) rcs $@ )

LDFLAGS was used here deliberately by commit:
8aba9dceebb14144e07d19593111ee3a999c37fc

I suspect your problem is because you have --gc-sections in
PLATFORM_LDFLAGS.  The above commit changed architectures that set
--gc-sections to use LDFLAGS_u-boot instead, but it missed boards that
set it.

Also note this patch, which if applied would mean that you'd need to
put --gc-sections in LDFLAGS_FINAL instead of LDFLAGS_u-boot:

http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/81206/

-Scott

[U-Boot] at91sam9263_nandflash build issues

[Marek Vasut]

On Wednesday 02 February 2011 20:43:00 Scott Wood wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2011 08:49:36 +0100
> 
> Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> wrote:
> > diff --git a/config.mk b/config.mk
> > index 5147c35..fe1d40c 100644
> > --- a/config.mk
> > +++ b/config.mk
> > @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@ $(obj)%.s:  %.c
> > 
> >  # If the list of objects to link is empty, just create an empty
> >  built-in.o cmd_link_o_target = $(if $(strip $1),\
> > 
> > -                     $(LD) $(LDFLAGS) -r -o $@ $1,\
> > +                     $(LD) -r -o $@ $1,\
> > 
> >                       rm -f $@; $(AR) rcs $@ )
> 
> LDFLAGS was used here deliberately by commit:
> 8aba9dceebb14144e07d19593111ee3a999c37fc

Oh my, it's not my platform. Also, you missed the comment where I said the patch 
is a mess, not a patch to be merged :) This time I really only forwarded a 
bugreport from irc channel with a bad sketch of a patch.
> 
> I suspect your problem is because you have --gc-sections in
> PLATFORM_LDFLAGS.  The above commit changed architectures that set
> --gc-sections to use LDFLAGS_u-boot instead, but it missed boards that
> set it.
> 
> Also note this patch, which if applied would mean that you'd need to
> put --gc-sections in LDFLAGS_FINAL instead of LDFLAGS_u-boot:
> 
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/81206/
> 
> -Scott