From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Heiko Schocher Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 09:10:51 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 03/12] 83xx, kmeter1: add I2C, dtt, eeprom support In-Reply-To: <20090218185507.4e3663ee.kim.phillips@freescale.com> References: <4993182D.2030003@denx.de> <20090216193614.1fe95a7e.kim.phillips@freescale.com> <499A532B.5030301@denx.de> <20090217192233.03b27dd7.kim.phillips@freescale.com> <499BC34D.5010004@denx.de> <20090218185507.4e3663ee.kim.phillips@freescale.com> Message-ID: <499D140B.6070001@denx.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hello Kim, Kim Phillips wrote: > On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 09:14:05 +0100 > Heiko Schocher wrote: [...] >> But I was wondering why the DTTs are initialized so early. Is this >> necessary? If not, I don;t need this ... > > I searched and didn't find out why. If there's no reason then maybe we > don't need it indeed. I think so too. > Meanwhile, I've applied the 'v2' versions of your patches and still > have trouble building the kmeter1 board*, probably due to inter-patch > dependencies in this patchseries. This means at minimum you're breaking > git-bisection abilities for your boards. Can you resubmit without > breaking bisection? :-( Sorry for that. I am actually learning that I have to look for such a point too. I always compiled with all off my patches... This happend, so I think, because the kmeter shares a lot of common options with other boards from this manufacturer ... and I did a rework from that common options in patch 10/12 ... I try to make a new series, without breaking bisection ... > Also, did you want any of these to go through the mpc83xx > tree, or should WD pick all of them up? Please make two separate > patchseries if you're targeting two trees. OK, thanks bye Heiko -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany