From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dan Malek <dan@embeddededge.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:44:31 -0400
Subject: [U-Boot-Users] u-boot 834x spd_ram
In-Reply-To: <9D7FFF69-B8C0-4603-831D-4EB1A0116B52@kernel.crashing.org>
References: <B2627A2E13B6DE4BADE1746A7DFBFA7E08050F@aimsg.corp.audiocodes.com> <9D7FFF69-B8C0-4603-831D-4EB1A0116B52@kernel.crashing.org>
Message-ID: <2E67DB8C-BC9D-4836-A2AB-6D75BE570199@embeddededge.com>
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

On Apr 18, 2006, at 9:51 AM, Kumar Gala wrote:

> I'm not aware of any.  I'm just guessing the boards people have  
> were built this way.

I have a board that doesn't use CS2/CS3.  Once I get it running
well I'll submit the patches.  Basically, I created a  #define
in the board configuration header file that indicates the base chip
select used.  I then use this base and base+1 in the code in place of
the hard coded assumption of CS2/3 in the spd_sdram.c file.


	-- Dan