[U-Boot-Users] mpc8245 changed from u-boot-1.0.0 to uboot-1.0.2

[U-Boot-Users] mpc8245 changed from u-boot-1.0.0 to uboot-1.0.2

[Matthew S. McClintock]

Hi all,
	
	I've run into a problem on our board with the latest u-boot-1.0.2.
Prior to this problem u-boot-1.0.0 worked flawlessly. So I am assuming
the problem is from a change between those two versions. 

	The problem is pretty simple, when u-boot is copying itself from flash
to ram it does not get copied correctly. If I step through the copying
of u-boot from flash to ram it copies fine, however if I let it copy at
full speed it does not get copied correctly. It seems like a memory
timing issue. But nothing has changed in cpu/mpc824x/cpu_init.c. I've
briefly looked through everything and I have not discovered any obvious
changes that could be causing this problem. 

	So I was hoping someone has seen something similar recently with their
mpc824x boards? Or if anyone else has any ideas about something that
might have changed?

Thanks,
Matthew


-- 
Matthew S. McClintock <mattsm@arlut.utexas.edu>

[U-Boot-Users] mpc8245 changed from u-boot-1.0.0 to uboot-1.0.2

[DeLaGarza, Robert]

Matthew S. McClintock wrote:
> Hi all,
> 	
> 	I've run into a problem on our board with the latest u-boot-1.0.2.
> Prior to this problem u-boot-1.0.0 worked flawlessly. So I am assuming
> the problem is from a change between those two versions. 
> 
> 	The problem is pretty simple, when u-boot is copying itself from flash
> to ram it does not get copied correctly. If I step through the copying
> of u-boot from flash to ram it copies fine, however if I let it copy at
> full speed it does not get copied correctly....


I've used U-Boot on the Artis SBC-A3000, which is based on the MPC8245. 
    I downloaded U-Boot 1.0.2 and compiled it with ELDK 2.0.2.  I was 
unable to recreate this problem--the board boots and starts Linux with 
no apparent problems.

-Robert

[U-Boot-Users] mpc8245 changed from u-boot-1.0.0 to uboot-1.0.2

[Matthew S. McClintock]

Some files where changed in our board directory, I am not sure how or
why they were changed. I do not see a mention of it in the changelog.
Attached is a patch correcting the problem, Wolfgang could you please
apply it? 

Thanks,
Matthew


On Sat, 2004-03-27 at 18:00, DeLaGarza, Robert wrote:
> Matthew S. McClintock wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 	
> > 	I've run into a problem on our board with the latest u-boot-1.0.2.
> > Prior to this problem u-boot-1.0.0 worked flawlessly. So I am assuming
> > the problem is from a change between those two versions. 
> > 
> > 	The problem is pretty simple, when u-boot is copying itself from flash
> > to ram it does not get copied correctly. If I step through the copying
> > of u-boot from flash to ram it copies fine, however if I let it copy at
> > full speed it does not get copied correctly....
> 
> 
> I've used U-Boot on the Artis SBC-A3000, which is based on the MPC8245. 
>     I downloaded U-Boot 1.0.2 and compiled it with ELDK 2.0.2.  I was 
> unable to recreate this problem--the board boots and starts Linux with 
> no apparent problems.
> 
> -Robert
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
> Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
> GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
> administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> U-Boot-Users mailing list
> U-Boot-Users at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: utx8245-fix.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 2733 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20040401/a7b1aefe/attachment.bin 

[U-Boot-Users] mpc8245 changed from u-boot-1.0.0 to uboot-1.0.2

[Matthew S. McClintock]

I'm sorry ignoring that last patch it still had crud in it, here is the
patch to apply.

Matthew

On Thu, 2004-04-01 at 10:02, Matthew S. McClintock wrote:
> Some files where changed in our board directory, I am not sure how or
> why they were changed. I do not see a mention of it in the changelog.
> Attached is a patch correcting the problem, Wolfgang could you please
> apply it? 
> 
> Thanks,
> Matthew
> 
> 
> On Sat, 2004-03-27 at 18:00, DeLaGarza, Robert wrote:
> > Matthew S. McClintock wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 	
> > > 	I've run into a problem on our board with the latest u-boot-1.0.2.
> > > Prior to this problem u-boot-1.0.0 worked flawlessly. So I am assuming
> > > the problem is from a change between those two versions. 
> > > 
> > > 	The problem is pretty simple, when u-boot is copying itself from flash
> > > to ram it does not get copied correctly. If I step through the copying
> > > of u-boot from flash to ram it copies fine, however if I let it copy at
> > > full speed it does not get copied correctly....
> > 
> > 
> > I've used U-Boot on the Artis SBC-A3000, which is based on the MPC8245. 
> >     I downloaded U-Boot 1.0.2 and compiled it with ELDK 2.0.2.  I was 
> > unable to recreate this problem--the board boots and starts Linux with 
> > no apparent problems.
> > 
> > -Robert
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
> > Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
> > GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
> > administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click
> > _______________________________________________
> > U-Boot-Users mailing list
> > U-Boot-Users at lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: utx8245-fix.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 2952 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20040401/e35babd6/attachment.bin 

[U-Boot-Users] mpc8245 changed from u-boot-1.0.0 to uboot-1.0.2

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <1080835333.3255.47.camel@sabrina.arlut.utexas.edu> you wrote:
> 
> Some files where changed in our board directory, I am not sure how or
> why they were changed. I do not see a mention of it in the changelog.

The relevant entry in the changelog is this:

	Add a common get_ram_size() function and modify the the
	board-specific files to invoke that common implementation.

> Attached is a patch correcting the problem, Wolfgang could you please
> apply it? 

No, I will not. Please make your board use the common code instead.

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
You're dead, Jim.
	-- McCoy, "The Tholian Web", stardate unknown

[U-Boot-Users] mpc8245 changed from u-boot-1.0.0 to uboot-1.0.2

[Matthew S. McClintock]

Here is the fix as you requested. But this begs the question, can our
board specific files change at anytime? And not only be changed but be
changed into something that does not work? 

I can understand changing code in the rest of u-boot and having that
break our board code, but I don't see the problem with our own board
code using a depreciated method? Maybe just a note in our board code
that a certain method is depreciated would be more appropriate? Is there
another reason I am missing?


Matthew

On Thu, 2004-04-01 at 13:29, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <1080835333.3255.47.camel@sabrina.arlut.utexas.edu> you wrote:
> > 
> > Some files where changed in our board directory, I am not sure how or
> > why they were changed. I do not see a mention of it in the changelog.
> 
> The relevant entry in the changelog is this:
> 
> 	Add a common get_ram_size() function and modify the the
> 	board-specific files to invoke that common implementation.
> 
> > Attached is a patch correcting the problem, Wolfgang could you please
> > apply it? 
> 
> No, I will not. Please make your board use the common code instead.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Wolfgang Denk
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: utx8245-fix-rev2.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 1891 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20040402/6bf5247a/attachment.bin 

[U-Boot-Users] mpc8245 changed from u-boot-1.0.0 to uboot-1.0.2

[Matthew S. McClintock]

Ugh, forgot CHANGELOG entry... here is the patch one more time.

On Fri, 2004-04-02 at 10:57, Matthew S. McClintock wrote:
> Here is the fix as you requested. But this begs the question, can our
> board specific files change at anytime? And not only be changed but be
> changed into something that does not work? 
> 
> I can understand changing code in the rest of u-boot and having that
> break our board code, but I don't see the problem with our own board
> code using a depreciated method? Maybe just a note in our board code
> that a certain method is depreciated would be more appropriate? Is there
> another reason I am missing?
> 
> 
> Matthew
> 
> On Thu, 2004-04-01 at 13:29, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > In message <1080835333.3255.47.camel@sabrina.arlut.utexas.edu> you wrote:
> > > 
> > > Some files where changed in our board directory, I am not sure how or
> > > why they were changed. I do not see a mention of it in the changelog.
> > 
> > The relevant entry in the changelog is this:
> > 
> > 	Add a common get_ram_size() function and modify the the
> > 	board-specific files to invoke that common implementation.
> > 
> > > Attached is a patch correcting the problem, Wolfgang could you please
> > > apply it? 
> > 
> > No, I will not. Please make your board use the common code instead.
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > 
> > Wolfgang Denk
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: utx8245-fix-rev2.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 2354 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20040402/a1eb97f5/attachment.bin 

[U-Boot-Users] mpc8245 changed from u-boot-1.0.0 to uboot-1.0.2

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <1080925072.4706.13.camel@sabrina.arlut.utexas.edu> you wrote:
> 
> Here is the fix as you requested. But this begs the question, can our
> board specific files change at anytime? And not only be changed but be
> changed into something that does not work? 

Actually this can happen any time. It is pretty unlikely, though.

But as maintainer of the U-Boot project I will occasionally decide to
check in patches which may effect board specific code, too.

To perform a global clean-up operations,  for  example  to  eliminate
redundand code and replace it by a common implementation like in this
case,  I have no other choice but to implement this change everywhere
and for every board. Of course we try to test on  as  many  different
boards as possible, but we cannot test on all boards.

Although never  put  down  in  writing  I  consider  it  one  of  the
responsibilities  of  a  board  maintainer  to check current versions
every now and then - and this definitely means more  frequently  than
once every three months.

> I can understand changing code in the rest of u-boot and having that
> break our board code, but I don't see the problem with our own board
> code using a depreciated method? Maybe just a note in our board code

Experience has shown that it simply does not work to change  the  im-
plementation  or  to  provide  new interfaces and simpy hope that all
board maintainers will adapt  these  changes  in  a  resonable  time.
Others  staring  with  a new port will are guaranteed to pick up such
old files as model, and continue to use the old stuff.

The only way to get consistent code is to enforce the change for  all
boards.

In your case it took nearly 3 months  until  you  even  noticed  that
something was changed.


> that a certain method is depreciated would be more appropriate? Is there
> another reason I am missing?

Guess how many  board  maintainers  will  change  working  code  just
because there is another way to do it?

Sorry, but in my experience this doesn't work.


I apologize for breaking your board.


Now for your patch:


> +		/* This code does not work, and needs to be fixed at a later
> +		date */

Do you really want me to check this in? I feel you should spend  some
more time and fix the code first and submit a new patch then.

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
Swap read error.  You lose your mind.

[U-Boot-Users] mpc8245 changed from u-boot-1.0.0 to uboot-1.0.2

[Matthew S. McClintock]

> 
> 
> Now for your patch:
> 
> 
> > +		/* This code does not work, and needs to be fixed at a later
> > +		date */
> 
> Do you really want me to check this in? I feel you should spend  some
> more time and fix the code first and submit a new patch then.
> 

The problem is time, no one has anytime to invest in the problem at the
moment. I've put the marker there so if someone else here needs that
functionality to work they will take the time to fix the problem (and
they will also quickly find what the problem is). I think the advantage
of having the latest u-boot working outweighs the incorrect code at the
moment considering all other factors.

Thanks,
Matthew

[U-Boot-Users] mpc8245 changed from u-boot-1.0.0 to uboot-1.0.2

[Kodis Babu Janardhanan]

Is there a U-boot for MPC8560 processor based target?.  We need to build a 
u-boot for 8560 based wind river board.

Thanks
-Kodis

[U-Boot-Users] mpc8245 changed from u-boot-1.0.0 to uboot-1.0.2

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <6.0.0.22.2.20040405141129.01c5f400@jittlov.qualcomm.com> you wrote:
> Is there a U-boot for MPC8560 processor based target?.  We need to build a 
> u-boot for 8560 based wind river board.

Yes, there is.

Why do you post your question under a completely unrelated subject??

Please don't do that!

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
Houston, Tranquillity Base here.  The Eagle has landed.
                                                    -- Neil Armstrong

[U-Boot-Users] mpc8245 changed from u-boot-1.0.0 to uboot-1.0.2

[Matthew S. McClintock]

You should not reply to messages and start a new topic, instead make new
topic for discussion.

And to answer you question, yes there is one board for the mpc8560
checked into u-boot that you could use as a starting point for your new
board. The board name is mpc8560ads if your interested in looking into
that.

Matthew


On Mon, 2004-04-05 at 16:13, Kodis Babu Janardhanan wrote:
> Is there a U-boot for MPC8560 processor based target?.  We need to build a 
> u-boot for 8560 based wind river board.
> 
> Thanks
> -Kodis
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
> Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
> GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
> administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> U-Boot-Users mailing list
> U-Boot-Users at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users

[U-Boot-Users] mpc8245 changed from u-boot-1.0.0 to uboot-1.0.2

[Dan Malek]

Kodis Babu Janardhanan wrote:

> Is there a U-boot for MPC8560 processor based target?

Yes, there is.


	-- Dan

[U-Boot-Users] Apologies..

[Kodis Babu Janardhanan]

My mistake, I forgot to change the subject line.

-Kodis

At 02:13 PM 4/5/2004, Kodis Babu Janardhanan wrote:
>Is there a U-boot for MPC8560 processor based target?.  We need to build a 
>u-boot for 8560 based wind river board.
>
>Thanks
>-Kodis
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
>Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
>GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
>administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click
>_______________________________________________
>U-Boot-Users mailing list
>U-Boot-Users at lists.sourceforge.net
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users

[U-Boot-Users] mpc8245 changed from u-boot-1.0.0 to uboot-1.0.2

[Matthew S. McClintock]

On Fri, 2004-04-02 at 12:05, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Now for your patch:
> 
> 
> > +		/* This code does not work, and needs to be fixed at a later
> > +		date */
> 
> Do you really want me to check this in? I feel you should spend  some
> more time and fix the code first and submit a new patch then.
> 

Attached is a new, working, patch. Could you please apply it when you
have time?

Thanks,
Matthew
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: utx5245-initdram-fix.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 2092 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20040414/3484e333/attachment.bin 

[U-Boot-Users] mpc8245 changed from u-boot-1.0.0 to uboot-1.0.2

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <1081955666.31819.5.camel@sabrina.arlut.utexas.edu> you wrote:
> 
> +* Patch by Matthew McClintock, 14 April 2004
> +  - fix initdram function for utx8245 board

Added, thanks.

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
Earth -- mother of the most beautiful women in the universe.
	-- Apollo, "Who Mourns for Adonais?" stardate 3468.1