[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Matthias Ludwig]

Signed-off-by: Matthias Ludwig <mludwig@ultratronik.de>
---
 board/omap3/evm/evm.c            |   16 ++++++++--------
 include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h |    5 +++--
 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/board/omap3/evm/evm.c b/board/omap3/evm/evm.c
index c008c2e..5fd5efa 100644
--- a/board/omap3/evm/evm.c
+++ b/board/omap3/evm/evm.c
@@ -92,17 +92,17 @@ void set_muxconf_regs(void)
 static void setup_net_chip(void)
 {
 	gpio_t *gpio3_base = (gpio_t *)OMAP34XX_GPIO3_BASE;
-	gpmc_csx_t *gpmc_cs6_base = (gpmc_csx_t *)GPMC_CONFIG_CS6_BASE;
+	gpmc_csx_t *gpmc_cs5_base = (gpmc_csx_t *)GPMC_CONFIG_CS5_BASE;
 	ctrl_t *ctrl_base = (ctrl_t *)OMAP34XX_CTRL_BASE;
 
 	/* Configure GPMC registers */
-	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG1, &gpmc_cs6_base->config1);
-	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG2, &gpmc_cs6_base->config2);
-	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG3, &gpmc_cs6_base->config3);
-	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG4, &gpmc_cs6_base->config4);
-	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG5, &gpmc_cs6_base->config5);
-	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG6, &gpmc_cs6_base->config6);
-	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG7, &gpmc_cs6_base->config7);
+	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG1, &gpmc_cs5_base->config1);
+	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG2, &gpmc_cs5_base->config2);
+	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG3, &gpmc_cs5_base->config3);
+	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG4, &gpmc_cs5_base->config4);
+	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG5, &gpmc_cs5_base->config5);
+	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG6, &gpmc_cs5_base->config6);
+	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG7, &gpmc_cs5_base->config7);
 
 	/* Enable off mode for NWE in PADCONF_GPMC_NWE register */
 	writew(readw(&ctrl_base ->gpmc_nwe) | 0x0E00, &ctrl_base->gpmc_nwe);
diff --git a/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h b/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h
index c544e0c..a4ce45a 100644
--- a/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h
+++ b/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h
@@ -84,9 +84,10 @@ typedef struct ctrl_id {
 /* GPMC CS3/cs4/cs6 not avaliable */
 #define GPMC_BASE		(OMAP34XX_GPMC_BASE)
 #define GPMC_CONFIG_CS0		0x60
-#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS6		0x150
+#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS5		0x150
+
 #define GPMC_CONFIG_CS0_BASE	(GPMC_BASE + GPMC_CONFIG_CS0)
-#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS6_BASE	(GPMC_BASE + GPMC_CONFIG_CS6)
+#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS5_BASE	(GPMC_BASE + GPMC_CONFIG_CS5)
 #define GPMC_CONFIG_WP		0x10
 
 #define GPMC_CONFIG_WIDTH	0x30
-- 
1.6.3.rc4.29.g8146

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Dirk Behme]

Matthias Ludwig wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Matthias Ludwig <mludwig@ultratronik.de>

Matthias: Thanks for fixing this!

Mani: Can we get your ack as EVM maintainer?

Many thanks and best regards

Dirk

> ---
>  board/omap3/evm/evm.c            |   16 ++++++++--------
>  include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h |    5 +++--
>  2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/board/omap3/evm/evm.c b/board/omap3/evm/evm.c
> index c008c2e..5fd5efa 100644
> --- a/board/omap3/evm/evm.c
> +++ b/board/omap3/evm/evm.c
> @@ -92,17 +92,17 @@ void set_muxconf_regs(void)
>  static void setup_net_chip(void)
>  {
>  	gpio_t *gpio3_base = (gpio_t *)OMAP34XX_GPIO3_BASE;
> -	gpmc_csx_t *gpmc_cs6_base = (gpmc_csx_t *)GPMC_CONFIG_CS6_BASE;
> +	gpmc_csx_t *gpmc_cs5_base = (gpmc_csx_t *)GPMC_CONFIG_CS5_BASE;
>  	ctrl_t *ctrl_base = (ctrl_t *)OMAP34XX_CTRL_BASE;
>  
>  	/* Configure GPMC registers */
> -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG1, &gpmc_cs6_base->config1);
> -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG2, &gpmc_cs6_base->config2);
> -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG3, &gpmc_cs6_base->config3);
> -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG4, &gpmc_cs6_base->config4);
> -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG5, &gpmc_cs6_base->config5);
> -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG6, &gpmc_cs6_base->config6);
> -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG7, &gpmc_cs6_base->config7);
> +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG1, &gpmc_cs5_base->config1);
> +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG2, &gpmc_cs5_base->config2);
> +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG3, &gpmc_cs5_base->config3);
> +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG4, &gpmc_cs5_base->config4);
> +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG5, &gpmc_cs5_base->config5);
> +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG6, &gpmc_cs5_base->config6);
> +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG7, &gpmc_cs5_base->config7);
>  
>  	/* Enable off mode for NWE in PADCONF_GPMC_NWE register */
>  	writew(readw(&ctrl_base ->gpmc_nwe) | 0x0E00, &ctrl_base->gpmc_nwe);
> diff --git a/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h b/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h
> index c544e0c..a4ce45a 100644
> --- a/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h
> +++ b/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h
> @@ -84,9 +84,10 @@ typedef struct ctrl_id {
>  /* GPMC CS3/cs4/cs6 not avaliable */
>  #define GPMC_BASE		(OMAP34XX_GPMC_BASE)
>  #define GPMC_CONFIG_CS0		0x60
> -#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS6		0x150
> +#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS5		0x150
> +
>  #define GPMC_CONFIG_CS0_BASE	(GPMC_BASE + GPMC_CONFIG_CS0)
> -#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS6_BASE	(GPMC_BASE + GPMC_CONFIG_CS6)
> +#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS5_BASE	(GPMC_BASE + GPMC_CONFIG_CS5)
>  #define GPMC_CONFIG_WP		0x10
>  
>  #define GPMC_CONFIG_WIDTH	0x30

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Pillai, Manikandan]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dirk Behme [mailto:dirk.behme at googlemail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 8:25 PM
> To: Matthias Ludwig; Pillai, Manikandan
> Cc: u-boot at lists.denx.de
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6
> 
> Matthias Ludwig wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Matthias Ludwig <mludwig@ultratronik.de>
> 
> Matthias: Thanks for fixing this!
[Pillai, Manikandan] not sure why this change in the Chip select

> 
> Mani: Can we get your ack as EVM maintainer?
> 
> Many thanks and best regards
> 
> Dirk
> 
> > ---
> >  board/omap3/evm/evm.c            |   16 ++++++++--------
> >  include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h |    5 +++--
> >  2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/board/omap3/evm/evm.c b/board/omap3/evm/evm.c
> > index c008c2e..5fd5efa 100644
> > --- a/board/omap3/evm/evm.c
> > +++ b/board/omap3/evm/evm.c
> > @@ -92,17 +92,17 @@ void set_muxconf_regs(void)
> >  static void setup_net_chip(void)
> >  {
> >  	gpio_t *gpio3_base = (gpio_t *)OMAP34XX_GPIO3_BASE;
> > -	gpmc_csx_t *gpmc_cs6_base = (gpmc_csx_t *)GPMC_CONFIG_CS6_BASE;
> > +	gpmc_csx_t *gpmc_cs5_base = (gpmc_csx_t *)GPMC_CONFIG_CS5_BASE;
> >  	ctrl_t *ctrl_base = (ctrl_t *)OMAP34XX_CTRL_BASE;
> >
> >  	/* Configure GPMC registers */
> > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG1, &gpmc_cs6_base->config1);
> > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG2, &gpmc_cs6_base->config2);
> > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG3, &gpmc_cs6_base->config3);
> > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG4, &gpmc_cs6_base->config4);
> > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG5, &gpmc_cs6_base->config5);
> > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG6, &gpmc_cs6_base->config6);
> > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG7, &gpmc_cs6_base->config7);
> > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG1, &gpmc_cs5_base->config1);
> > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG2, &gpmc_cs5_base->config2);
> > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG3, &gpmc_cs5_base->config3);
> > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG4, &gpmc_cs5_base->config4);
> > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG5, &gpmc_cs5_base->config5);
> > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG6, &gpmc_cs5_base->config6);
> > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG7, &gpmc_cs5_base->config7);
> >
> >  	/* Enable off mode for NWE in PADCONF_GPMC_NWE register */
> >  	writew(readw(&ctrl_base ->gpmc_nwe) | 0x0E00, &ctrl_base->gpmc_nwe);
> > diff --git a/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h b/include/asm-arm/arch-
> omap3/cpu.h
> > index c544e0c..a4ce45a 100644
> > --- a/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h
> > +++ b/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h
> > @@ -84,9 +84,10 @@ typedef struct ctrl_id {
> >  /* GPMC CS3/cs4/cs6 not avaliable */
> >  #define GPMC_BASE		(OMAP34XX_GPMC_BASE)
> >  #define GPMC_CONFIG_CS0		0x60
> > -#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS6		0x150
> > +#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS5		0x150
> > +
> >  #define GPMC_CONFIG_CS0_BASE	(GPMC_BASE + GPMC_CONFIG_CS0)
> > -#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS6_BASE	(GPMC_BASE + GPMC_CONFIG_CS6)
> > +#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS5_BASE	(GPMC_BASE + GPMC_CONFIG_CS5)
> >  #define GPMC_CONFIG_WP		0x10
> >
> >  #define GPMC_CONFIG_WIDTH	0x30
> 

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Matthias Ludwig]

This is not really a change. The cs configuration was correct, but not
the naming of it.

OMAP34XX_GPMC_BASE (0x6e000000) + 0x150 = base address of configuration
registers for GPMC-CS5 not GPMC-CS6.

best regards,
Matthias


On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 12:34:01PM +0530, Pillai, Manikandan wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dirk Behme [mailto:dirk.behme at googlemail.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 8:25 PM
> > To: Matthias Ludwig; Pillai, Manikandan
> > Cc: u-boot at lists.denx.de
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6
> > 
> > Matthias Ludwig wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Matthias Ludwig <mludwig@ultratronik.de>
> > 
> > Matthias: Thanks for fixing this!
> [Pillai, Manikandan] not sure why this change in the Chip select
> 
> > 
> > Mani: Can we get your ack as EVM maintainer?
> > 
> > Many thanks and best regards
> > 
> > Dirk
> > 
> > > ---
> > >  board/omap3/evm/evm.c            |   16 ++++++++--------
> > >  include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h |    5 +++--
> > >  2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/board/omap3/evm/evm.c b/board/omap3/evm/evm.c
> > > index c008c2e..5fd5efa 100644
> > > --- a/board/omap3/evm/evm.c
> > > +++ b/board/omap3/evm/evm.c
> > > @@ -92,17 +92,17 @@ void set_muxconf_regs(void)
> > >  static void setup_net_chip(void)
> > >  {
> > >  	gpio_t *gpio3_base = (gpio_t *)OMAP34XX_GPIO3_BASE;
> > > -	gpmc_csx_t *gpmc_cs6_base = (gpmc_csx_t *)GPMC_CONFIG_CS6_BASE;
> > > +	gpmc_csx_t *gpmc_cs5_base = (gpmc_csx_t *)GPMC_CONFIG_CS5_BASE;
> > >  	ctrl_t *ctrl_base = (ctrl_t *)OMAP34XX_CTRL_BASE;
> > >
> > >  	/* Configure GPMC registers */
> > > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG1, &gpmc_cs6_base->config1);
> > > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG2, &gpmc_cs6_base->config2);
> > > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG3, &gpmc_cs6_base->config3);
> > > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG4, &gpmc_cs6_base->config4);
> > > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG5, &gpmc_cs6_base->config5);
> > > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG6, &gpmc_cs6_base->config6);
> > > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG7, &gpmc_cs6_base->config7);
> > > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG1, &gpmc_cs5_base->config1);
> > > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG2, &gpmc_cs5_base->config2);
> > > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG3, &gpmc_cs5_base->config3);
> > > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG4, &gpmc_cs5_base->config4);
> > > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG5, &gpmc_cs5_base->config5);
> > > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG6, &gpmc_cs5_base->config6);
> > > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG7, &gpmc_cs5_base->config7);
> > >
> > >  	/* Enable off mode for NWE in PADCONF_GPMC_NWE register */
> > >  	writew(readw(&ctrl_base ->gpmc_nwe) | 0x0E00, &ctrl_base->gpmc_nwe);
> > > diff --git a/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h b/include/asm-arm/arch-
> > omap3/cpu.h
> > > index c544e0c..a4ce45a 100644
> > > --- a/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h
> > > +++ b/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h
> > > @@ -84,9 +84,10 @@ typedef struct ctrl_id {
> > >  /* GPMC CS3/cs4/cs6 not avaliable */
> > >  #define GPMC_BASE		(OMAP34XX_GPMC_BASE)
> > >  #define GPMC_CONFIG_CS0		0x60
> > > -#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS6		0x150
> > > +#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS5		0x150
> > > +
> > >  #define GPMC_CONFIG_CS0_BASE	(GPMC_BASE + GPMC_CONFIG_CS0)
> > > -#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS6_BASE	(GPMC_BASE + GPMC_CONFIG_CS6)
> > > +#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS5_BASE	(GPMC_BASE + GPMC_CONFIG_CS5)
> > >  #define GPMC_CONFIG_WP		0x10
> > >
> > >  #define GPMC_CONFIG_WIDTH	0x30
> > 
> 

-- 
Matthias Ludwig, Software Development
Ultratronik Entwicklungs GmbH, Gewerbestrasse 52, 82211 Herrsching, Germany
http://www.ultratronik.de  Tel: +49 8152 3709-356  Fax: +49 8152 5183
Registergericht Muenchen, HRB 55584

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Pillai, Manikandan]

ACKed

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthias Ludwig [mailto:mludwig at ultratronik.de]
> Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 12:42 PM
> To: Pillai, Manikandan
> Cc: Dirk Behme; u-boot at lists.denx.de
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6
> 
> This is not really a change. The cs configuration was correct, but not
> the naming of it.
> 
> OMAP34XX_GPMC_BASE (0x6e000000) + 0x150 = base address of configuration
> registers for GPMC-CS5 not GPMC-CS6.
> 
> best regards,
> Matthias
> 
> 
> On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 12:34:01PM +0530, Pillai, Manikandan wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Dirk Behme [mailto:dirk.behme at googlemail.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 8:25 PM
> > > To: Matthias Ludwig; Pillai, Manikandan
> > > Cc: u-boot at lists.denx.de
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6
> > >
> > > Matthias Ludwig wrote:
> > > > Signed-off-by: Matthias Ludwig <mludwig@ultratronik.de>
> > >
> > > Matthias: Thanks for fixing this!
> > [Pillai, Manikandan] not sure why this change in the Chip select
> >
> > >
> > > Mani: Can we get your ack as EVM maintainer?
> > >
> > > Many thanks and best regards
> > >
> > > Dirk
> > >
> > > > ---
> > > >  board/omap3/evm/evm.c            |   16 ++++++++--------
> > > >  include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h |    5 +++--
> > > >  2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/board/omap3/evm/evm.c b/board/omap3/evm/evm.c
> > > > index c008c2e..5fd5efa 100644
> > > > --- a/board/omap3/evm/evm.c
> > > > +++ b/board/omap3/evm/evm.c
> > > > @@ -92,17 +92,17 @@ void set_muxconf_regs(void)
> > > >  static void setup_net_chip(void)
> > > >  {
> > > >  	gpio_t *gpio3_base = (gpio_t *)OMAP34XX_GPIO3_BASE;
> > > > -	gpmc_csx_t *gpmc_cs6_base = (gpmc_csx_t *)GPMC_CONFIG_CS6_BASE;
> > > > +	gpmc_csx_t *gpmc_cs5_base = (gpmc_csx_t *)GPMC_CONFIG_CS5_BASE;
> > > >  	ctrl_t *ctrl_base = (ctrl_t *)OMAP34XX_CTRL_BASE;
> > > >
> > > >  	/* Configure GPMC registers */
> > > > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG1, &gpmc_cs6_base->config1);
> > > > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG2, &gpmc_cs6_base->config2);
> > > > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG3, &gpmc_cs6_base->config3);
> > > > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG4, &gpmc_cs6_base->config4);
> > > > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG5, &gpmc_cs6_base->config5);
> > > > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG6, &gpmc_cs6_base->config6);
> > > > -	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG7, &gpmc_cs6_base->config7);
> > > > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG1, &gpmc_cs5_base->config1);
> > > > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG2, &gpmc_cs5_base->config2);
> > > > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG3, &gpmc_cs5_base->config3);
> > > > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG4, &gpmc_cs5_base->config4);
> > > > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG5, &gpmc_cs5_base->config5);
> > > > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG6, &gpmc_cs5_base->config6);
> > > > +	writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG7, &gpmc_cs5_base->config7);
> > > >
> > > >  	/* Enable off mode for NWE in PADCONF_GPMC_NWE register */
> > > >  	writew(readw(&ctrl_base ->gpmc_nwe) | 0x0E00, &ctrl_base-
> >gpmc_nwe);
> > > > diff --git a/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h b/include/asm-arm/arch-
> > > omap3/cpu.h
> > > > index c544e0c..a4ce45a 100644
> > > > --- a/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h
> > > > +++ b/include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/cpu.h
> > > > @@ -84,9 +84,10 @@ typedef struct ctrl_id {
> > > >  /* GPMC CS3/cs4/cs6 not avaliable */
> > > >  #define GPMC_BASE		(OMAP34XX_GPMC_BASE)
> > > >  #define GPMC_CONFIG_CS0		0x60
> > > > -#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS6		0x150
> > > > +#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS5		0x150
> > > > +
> > > >  #define GPMC_CONFIG_CS0_BASE	(GPMC_BASE + GPMC_CONFIG_CS0)
> > > > -#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS6_BASE	(GPMC_BASE + GPMC_CONFIG_CS6)
> > > > +#define GPMC_CONFIG_CS5_BASE	(GPMC_BASE + GPMC_CONFIG_CS5)
> > > >  #define GPMC_CONFIG_WP		0x10
> > > >
> > > >  #define GPMC_CONFIG_WIDTH	0x30
> > >
> >
> 
> --
> Matthias Ludwig, Software Development
> Ultratronik Entwicklungs GmbH, Gewerbestrasse 52, 82211 Herrsching, Germany
> http://www.ultratronik.de  Tel: +49 8152 3709-356  Fax: +49 8152 5183
> Registergericht Muenchen, HRB 55584

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Matthias Ludwig,

In message <20090507071155.GA8961@ultratronik.de> you wrote:
> This is not really a change. The cs configuration was correct, but not
> the naming of it.
> 
> OMAP34XX_GPMC_BASE (0x6e000000) + 0x150 = base address of configuration
> registers for GPMC-CS5 not GPMC-CS6.

Can we please get rid of all this crap with register offsets and
device accesses through pointers using base address plus offset?

Please provide proper C structs!

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
"Wish not to seem, but to be, the best."                  - Aeschylus

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Dirk Behme]

Dear Wolfgang,

Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Matthias Ludwig,
> 
> In message <20090507071155.GA8961@ultratronik.de> you wrote:
>> This is not really a change. The cs configuration was correct, but not
>> the naming of it.
>>
>> OMAP34XX_GPMC_BASE (0x6e000000) + 0x150 = base address of configuration
>> registers for GPMC-CS5 not GPMC-CS6.
> 
> Can we please get rid of all this crap with register offsets and
> device accesses through pointers using base address plus offset?
> 
> Please provide proper C structs!

Would you like to have a look to the code snippet visible in Matthias' 
patch

http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/052157.html

?

It's my understanding that what's in code

writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG1, &gpmc_cs5_base->config1);

is what you want? I.e. as I understand it, the code is correct (we use 
C structs), and the style Matthias used above you complain about was 
just for patch explanation (to make it easier understandable).

Sorry if I missed something, just correct then ;)

Best regards

Dirk

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Dirk,

In message <4A02FB34.2090907@googlemail.com> you wrote:
> 
> > Please provide proper C structs!
> 
> Would you like to have a look to the code snippet visible in Matthias' 
> patch
> 
> http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/052157.html
> 
> ?

Done.

> It's my understanding that what's in code
> 
> writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG1, &gpmc_cs5_base->config1);
> 
> is what you want? I.e. as I understand it, the code is correct (we use 

It is only part of what I want to see. There are still deficiencies.

Yes, we have a struct gpmc_csx, that's good.

Note though that using such typedef's not in line with the Coding
Style, which says: "It's a _mistake_ to use typedef for structures
and pointers." Also, checkpatch.pl complains about this.

The next problem is that the entries in these structs are declared as
"unsigned int", which just happens to work by chance. "u32" would be
more reliable.

Finally, and this is what I really compalin about, is that there is no
big structure which includes all the blocks that make up the CPU into
one big structure (as it's done for example for PowerPC systems in the
include/asm-ppc/*immap* files) - you still use code like

gpmc_csx_t *gpmc_cs5_base = (gpmc_csx_t *)GPMC_CONFIG_CS5_BASE;

to locate each of the individual C structs in the memory map; instead,
onle one single pointer to the internal memory should be needed.

> Sorry if I missed something, just correct then ;)

Done.  Thanks.

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
Winners never talk about glorious victories. That's  because  they're
the  ones  who  see  what the battlefield looks like afterwards. It's
only the losers who have glorious victories.
                                      - Terry Pratchett, _Small Gods_

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Scott Wood]

Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Finally, and this is what I really compalin about, is that there is no
> big structure which includes all the blocks that make up the CPU into
> one big structure (as it's done for example for PowerPC systems in the
> include/asm-ppc/*immap* files) - you still use code like

Those immap structs are a huge pain to maintain (or to verify the 
correctness of), loaded with ifdeffery and magic numbers describing 
reserved spans.  We should not be emulating them.

We used to have them in Linux, and got rid of them.

-Scott

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Scott,

In message <4A0333FC.6090900@freescale.com> you wrote:
> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Finally, and this is what I really compalin about, is that there is no
> > big structure which includes all the blocks that make up the CPU into
> > one big structure (as it's done for example for PowerPC systems in the
> > include/asm-ppc/*immap* files) - you still use code like
> 
> Those immap structs are a huge pain to maintain (or to verify the 
> correctness of), loaded with ifdeffery and magic numbers describing 
> reserved spans.  We should not be emulating them.

Well, #define'ing long lists of register offsets  is  not  easier  to
maintain  or  verify,  and  you  don't  have  any typechecking by the
compiler.

> We used to have them in Linux, and got rid of them.

Hm... Seems I have missed this change... What's things like

	struct qe_immap __iomem *qe_immr
or
	cpm2_map_t __iomem *cpm2_immr
or
	immap_t __iomem *mpc8xx_immr

then? Or what replaced the "immr" structs?

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
The manager will be continually amazed that policies he took for com-
mon knowledge are totally unknown by some member of his  team.  Since
his fundamental job is to keep everybody going in the same direction,
his chief daily task will be communication, not decision-making.
                              - Fred Brooks, "The Mythical Man Month"

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Scott Wood]

Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Scott,
> 
> In message <4A0333FC.6090900@freescale.com> you wrote:
>> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>> Finally, and this is what I really compalin about, is that there is no
>>> big structure which includes all the blocks that make up the CPU into
>>> one big structure (as it's done for example for PowerPC systems in the
>>> include/asm-ppc/*immap* files) - you still use code like
>> Those immap structs are a huge pain to maintain (or to verify the 
>> correctness of), loaded with ifdeffery and magic numbers describing 
>> reserved spans.  We should not be emulating them.
> 
> Well, #define'ing long lists of register offsets  is  not  easier  to
> maintain  or  verify, 

IMHO it is; you can just compare to the manual rather than have offsets 
be screwed up if something is missing, out of order, or the wrong size. 
  That's countered by the typechecking and ease of use of structs, though.

> and  you  don't  have  any typechecking by the
> compiler.

It doesn't have to be all one or the other.  Use structs to describe 
individual blocks (provided they're not too sparsely populated), but 
define block addresses rather than huge structs consisting of sub-blocks 
and empty space.  And let the details be flexible at the 
author/maintainer's discretion, rather than a rigid rule.

>> We used to have them in Linux, and got rid of them.
> 
> Hm... Seems I have missed this change... What's things like
> 
> 	struct qe_immap __iomem *qe_immr
> or
> 	cpm2_map_t __iomem *cpm2_immr
> or
> 	immap_t __iomem *mpc8xx_immr
> 
> then?

Legacy stuff that hasn't been fully cleaned up.  There used to be immap 
structs for 83xx and 85xx back in arch/ppc IIRC.

> Or what replaced the "immr" structs?

The device tree, mainly.  But #defines can work for u-boot.

-Scott

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Scott Wood,

In message <4A034B09.7030105@freescale.com> you wrote:
>
> > Or what replaced the "immr" structs?
> 
> The device tree, mainly...

Right, of course.

>                      ...  But #defines can work for u-boot.

Of course they _can_ work. But they can easily fail (as we just see
in this patch), and we don't have typechecking. So until DT's are
omnipresent, let's use structs in U-Boot, please.

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
When in doubt, mumble;   when in trouble, delegate;  when in  charge,
ponder.                                             -- James H. Boren

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Scott Wood]

Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Scott Wood,
> 
> In message <4A034B09.7030105@freescale.com> you wrote:
>>> Or what replaced the "immr" structs?
>> The device tree, mainly...
> 
> Right, of course.
> 
>>                      ...  But #defines can work for u-boot.
> 
> Of course they _can_ work. But they can easily fail (as we just see
> in this patch), and we don't have typechecking. So until DT's are
> omnipresent, let's use structs in U-Boot, please.

You *do* have typechecking as long as the individual blocks are 
described with structs.

We could take immap to extremes by defining one big 4GiB struct that 
shows where memory, immr, flash, desired PCI bars, FPGAs, etc. are -- 
but that would be silly.  IMHO, so is doing it at the immr level. :-)

How would you deal with blocks being at different locations in different 
chips?  It's a lot easier to ifdef (or have the config file specify) a 
couple addresses than to ifdef the locations of fields in a struct, 
especially when you have more than a couple variations.

-Scott

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Detlev Zundel]

Hi,

> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>> Dear Scott Wood,
>> 
>> In message <4A034B09.7030105@freescale.com> you wrote:
>>>> Or what replaced the "immr" structs?
>>> The device tree, mainly...
>> 
>> Right, of course.
>> 
>>>                      ...  But #defines can work for u-boot.
>> 
>> Of course they _can_ work. But they can easily fail (as we just see
>> in this patch), and we don't have typechecking. So until DT's are
>> omnipresent, let's use structs in U-Boot, please.
>
> You *do* have typechecking as long as the individual blocks are 
> described with structs.
>
> We could take immap to extremes by defining one big 4GiB struct that 
> shows where memory, immr, flash, desired PCI bars, FPGAs, etc. are -- 
> but that would be silly.  IMHO, so is doing it at the immr level. :-)
>
> How would you deal with blocks being at different locations in different 
> chips?  It's a lot easier to ifdef (or have the config file specify) a 
> couple addresses than to ifdef the locations of fields in a struct, 
> especially when you have more than a couple variations.

For what its worth, I'm with Scott here.  Structures for register blocks
is very nice and should be mandated and it seems they are maintainable.
Locations of individual blocks (or number of incarnations thereof) seem
to change frequently and thus tend to be less friendly to "whole
internal address space" structures.  So the latter may better be mapped
by single defines.  The correctness of them is easily validated and an
incorrect value will immediatley be discovered.

Cheers
  Detlev

-- 
config LGUEST
        If unsure, say N.  If curious, say M.  If masochistic, say Y.
                                     -- linux/drivers/lguest/Kconfig
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich,  Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-40 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: dzu at denx.de

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Dirk Behme]

Hi,

Detlev Zundel wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>> Dear Scott Wood,
>>>
>>> In message <4A034B09.7030105@freescale.com> you wrote:
>>>>> Or what replaced the "immr" structs?
>>>> The device tree, mainly...
>>> Right, of course.
>>>
>>>>                      ...  But #defines can work for u-boot.
>>> Of course they _can_ work. But they can easily fail (as we just see
>>> in this patch), and we don't have typechecking. So until DT's are
>>> omnipresent, let's use structs in U-Boot, please.
>> You *do* have typechecking as long as the individual blocks are 
>> described with structs.
>>
>> We could take immap to extremes by defining one big 4GiB struct that 
>> shows where memory, immr, flash, desired PCI bars, FPGAs, etc. are -- 
>> but that would be silly.  IMHO, so is doing it at the immr level. :-)
>>
>> How would you deal with blocks being at different locations in different 
>> chips?  It's a lot easier to ifdef (or have the config file specify) a 
>> couple addresses than to ifdef the locations of fields in a struct, 
>> especially when you have more than a couple variations.
> 
> For what its worth, I'm with Scott here.  Structures for register blocks
> is very nice and should be mandated and it seems they are maintainable.
> Locations of individual blocks (or number of incarnations thereof) seem
> to change frequently and thus tend to be less friendly to "whole
> internal address space" structures.  So the latter may better be mapped
> by single defines.  The correctness of them is easily validated and an
> incorrect value will immediatley be discovered.

I tend to agree with Scott and Detlev, too. At least from practical 
point of view

http://www.ti.com/litv/pdf/spruf98b

(attention: ~40MB) ;)

Best regards

Dirk

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Matthias Ludwig]

Wolfgang, Dirk,

cause for this patch was originally the plan to bring my company's new
omap3-based platform into U-Boot. As we do use other CS for a network
chip this patch was intended to be the starting point (otherwise our
patchset will not apply).

I can prepare a big #define -> c_struct patch for omap next week.
The only problem i see, my following patches will be rebased onto that
and will only apply after the transition #define -> c_struct is done.

If this is ok for you i will submit this mid/end of next week.

best regards,
Matthias

On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 08:58:17PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Dirk,
> 
> In message <4A02FB34.2090907@googlemail.com> you wrote:
> > 
> > > Please provide proper C structs!
> > 
> > Would you like to have a look to the code snippet visible in Matthias' 
> > patch
> > 
> > http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/052157.html
> > 
> > ?
> 
> Done.
> 
> > It's my understanding that what's in code
> > 
> > writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG1, &gpmc_cs5_base->config1);
> > 
> > is what you want? I.e. as I understand it, the code is correct (we use 
> 
> It is only part of what I want to see. There are still deficiencies.
> 
> Yes, we have a struct gpmc_csx, that's good.
> 
> Note though that using such typedef's not in line with the Coding
> Style, which says: "It's a _mistake_ to use typedef for structures
> and pointers." Also, checkpatch.pl complains about this.
> 
> The next problem is that the entries in these structs are declared as
> "unsigned int", which just happens to work by chance. "u32" would be
> more reliable.
> 
> Finally, and this is what I really compalin about, is that there is no
> big structure which includes all the blocks that make up the CPU into
> one big structure (as it's done for example for PowerPC systems in the
> include/asm-ppc/*immap* files) - you still use code like
> 
> gpmc_csx_t *gpmc_cs5_base = (gpmc_csx_t *)GPMC_CONFIG_CS5_BASE;
> 
> to locate each of the individual C structs in the memory map; instead,
> onle one single pointer to the internal memory should be needed.
> 
> > Sorry if I missed something, just correct then ;)
> 
> Done.  Thanks.
> 
> 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
> Winners never talk about glorious victories. That's  because  they're
> the  ones  who  see  what the battlefield looks like afterwards. It's
> only the losers who have glorious victories.
>                                       - Terry Pratchett, _Small Gods_

-- 
Matthias Ludwig, Software Development
Ultratronik Entwicklungs GmbH, Gewerbestrasse 52, 82211 Herrsching, Germany
http://www.ultratronik.de  Tel: +49 8152 3709-356  Fax: +49 8152 5183
Registergericht Muenchen, HRB 55584

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Matthias,

In message <20090508084234.GA6403@ultratronik.de> you wrote:
> 
> cause for this patch was originally the plan to bring my company's new
> omap3-based platform into U-Boot. As we do use other CS for a network
> chip this patch was intended to be the starting point (otherwise our
> patchset will not apply).
> 
> I can prepare a big #define -> c_struct patch for omap next week.
> The only problem i see, my following patches will be rebased onto that
> and will only apply after the transition #define -> c_struct is done.
> 
> If this is ok for you i will submit this mid/end of next week.

It's fine with me.

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
I have yet to add the ESP-driver to the kernel to read  the  mind  of
the user...                                       - Linus Torvalds in
      <Pine.LNX.3.91.960426110644.24860I-100000@linux.cs.Helsinki.FI>

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Dirk Behme]

Dear Matthias,

Matthias Ludwig wrote:
> Wolfgang, Dirk,
> 
> cause for this patch was originally the plan to bring my company's new
> omap3-based platform into U-Boot. As we do use other CS for a network
> chip this patch was intended to be the starting point (otherwise our
> patchset will not apply).
> 
> I can prepare a big #define -> c_struct patch for omap next week.
> The only problem i see, my following patches will be rebased onto that
> and will only apply after the transition #define -> c_struct is done.
> 
> If this is ok for you i will submit this mid/end of next week.

If you do it for all OMAP3 boards currently in mainline and don't 
break anything, I'm fine with this, too.

Many thanks

Dirk

> On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 08:58:17PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>> Dear Dirk,
>>
>> In message <4A02FB34.2090907@googlemail.com> you wrote:
>>>> Please provide proper C structs!
>>> Would you like to have a look to the code snippet visible in Matthias' 
>>> patch
>>>
>>> http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/052157.html
>>>
>>> ?
>> Done.
>>
>>> It's my understanding that what's in code
>>>
>>> writel(NET_GPMC_CONFIG1, &gpmc_cs5_base->config1);
>>>
>>> is what you want? I.e. as I understand it, the code is correct (we use 
>> It is only part of what I want to see. There are still deficiencies.
>>
>> Yes, we have a struct gpmc_csx, that's good.
>>
>> Note though that using such typedef's not in line with the Coding
>> Style, which says: "It's a _mistake_ to use typedef for structures
>> and pointers." Also, checkpatch.pl complains about this.
>>
>> The next problem is that the entries in these structs are declared as
>> "unsigned int", which just happens to work by chance. "u32" would be
>> more reliable.
>>
>> Finally, and this is what I really compalin about, is that there is no
>> big structure which includes all the blocks that make up the CPU into
>> one big structure (as it's done for example for PowerPC systems in the
>> include/asm-ppc/*immap* files) - you still use code like
>>
>> gpmc_csx_t *gpmc_cs5_base = (gpmc_csx_t *)GPMC_CONFIG_CS5_BASE;
>>
>> to locate each of the individual C structs in the memory map; instead,
>> onle one single pointer to the internal memory should be needed.
>>
>>> Sorry if I missed something, just correct then ;)
>> Done.  Thanks.
>>
>> 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
>> Winners never talk about glorious victories. That's  because  they're
>> the  ones  who  see  what the battlefield looks like afterwards. It's
>> only the losers who have glorious victories.
>>                                       - Terry Pratchett, _Small Gods_
> 

[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: net_chip uses CS5 not CS6

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

On 09:11 Thu 07 May     , Matthias Ludwig wrote:
> This is not really a change. The cs configuration was correct, but not
> the naming of it.
> 
> OMAP34XX_GPMC_BASE (0x6e000000) + 0x150 = base address of configuration
> registers for GPMC-CS5 not GPMC-CS6.
so please fix the comment

Best Regards,
J.