[U-Boot] [PATCH] Atmel LCD driver GUARDTIME fix

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Atmel LCD driver GUARDTIME fix

[Mark Jackson]

This patch correctly sets up the guard time parameter in
the Atmel LCDC driver.

This works on the AVR32 platform, but needs to be tested
under the AT91 platform which shares the same code base.

Signed-off-by: Mark Jackson <mpfj@mimc.co.uk>
---
  drivers/video/atmel_lcdfb.c |    5 +++--
  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/video/atmel_lcdfb.c b/drivers/video/atmel_lcdfb.c
index 3a51cc7..14f578e 100644
--- a/drivers/video/atmel_lcdfb.c
+++ b/drivers/video/atmel_lcdfb.c
@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ short console_row;
  /* configurable parameters */
  #define ATMEL_LCDC_CVAL_DEFAULT		0xc8
  #define ATMEL_LCDC_DMA_BURST_LEN	8
+#define ATMEL_LCDC_GUARD_TIME		2

  #if defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9263) || defined(CONFIG_AT91CAP9)
  #define ATMEL_LCDC_FIFO_SIZE		2048
@@ -69,7 +70,7 @@ void lcd_ctrl_init(void *lcdbase)

  	/* Turn off the LCD controller and the DMA controller */
  	lcdc_writel(panel_info.mmio, ATMEL_LCDC_PWRCON,
-		    1 << ATMEL_LCDC_GUARDT_OFFSET);
+		    ATMEL_LCDC_GUARD_TIME << ATMEL_LCDC_GUARDT_OFFSET);

  	/* Wait for the LCDC core to become idle */
  	while (lcdc_readl(panel_info.mmio, ATMEL_LCDC_PWRCON) & ATMEL_LCDC_BUSY)
@@ -150,7 +151,7 @@ void lcd_ctrl_init(void *lcdbase)

  	lcdc_writel(panel_info.mmio, ATMEL_LCDC_DMACON, ATMEL_LCDC_DMAEN);
  	lcdc_writel(panel_info.mmio, ATMEL_LCDC_PWRCON,
-		    (1 << ATMEL_LCDC_GUARDT_OFFSET) | ATMEL_LCDC_PWR);
+		    (ATMEL_LCDC_GUARD_TIME << ATMEL_LCDC_GUARDT_OFFSET) | ATMEL_LCDC_PWR);
  }

  ulong calc_fbsize(void)

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Atmel LCD driver GUARDTIME fix

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

On 13:46 Tue 16 Jun     , Mark Jackson wrote:
> This patch correctly sets up the guard time parameter in
> the Atmel LCDC driver.
> 
> This works on the AVR32 platform, but needs to be tested
> under the AT91 platform which shares the same code base.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Jackson <mpfj@mimc.co.uk>
> ---
does not apply

Best Regards,
J.

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Atmel LCD driver GUARDTIME fix

[Mark Jackson]

Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> On 13:46 Tue 16 Jun     , Mark Jackson wrote:
>> This patch correctly sets up the guard time parameter in
>> the Atmel LCDC driver.
>>
>> This works on the AVR32 platform, but needs to be tested
>> under the AT91 platform which shares the same code base.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mark Jackson <mpfj@mimc.co.uk>
>> ---
> does not apply

Sorry ... does that mean the patch fails in some way, or that this patch is 
not relevant ?

Mark

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Atmel LCD driver GUARDTIME fix

[Anatolij Gustschin]

Mark Jackson wrote:
> Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
...
>> does not apply
> 
> Sorry ... does that mean the patch fails in some way, or that this patch is 
> not relevant ?

ag at wker:~/git/u-boot$ patch -p1 --dry-run < ~/devel/u-boot-video/\[U-Boot\]\ \[PATCH\]\ Atmel\ LCD\ driver\ GUARDTIME\ fix.eml 
patching file drivers/video/atmel_lcdfb.c
Hunk #1 FAILED at 42.
Hunk #2 FAILED at 70.
Hunk #3 FAILED@151.
3 out of 3 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file drivers/video/atmel_lcdfb.c.rej

please rebase on top of u-boot/master branch. TIA.

Best regards,
Anatolij

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Atmel LCD driver GUARDTIME fix

[Mark Jackson]

Anatolij Gustschin wrote:
> Mark Jackson wrote:
>> Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> ...
>>> does not apply
>> Sorry ... does that mean the patch fails in some way, or that this patch is 
>> not relevant ?
> 
> ag at wker:~/git/u-boot$ patch -p1 --dry-run < ~/devel/u-boot-video/\[U-Boot\]\ \[PATCH\]\ Atmel\ LCD\ driver\ GUARDTIME\ fix.eml 
> patching file drivers/video/atmel_lcdfb.c
> Hunk #1 FAILED at 42.
> Hunk #2 FAILED at 70.
> Hunk #3 FAILED at 151.
> 3 out of 3 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file drivers/video/atmel_lcdfb.c.rej
> 
> please rebase on top of u-boot/master branch. TIA.

Hmmm ... this is strange.  The patch *is* based on the latest gut master !!

I mailed the patch to both u-boot at lists.denx.de and u-boot at avr32linux.org 
mailing lists (the same email, I just added both ml address in the To: box)

Looking at mail that came in on the u-boot ML, I can see that an space at the 
start of most of the patch lines ... argh !!

The patch itself works fine ... it looks like one of the mail servers has 
mangled my patch.

I'll try it again ... and CC you all in.

Regards
Mark