From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stefano Babic Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 13:39:37 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/1] IMX: rename mx51 to mx5 In-Reply-To: <1287109376-29889-1-git-send-email-r64343@freescale.com> References: <1287109376-29889-1-git-send-email-r64343@freescale.com> Message-ID: <4CB83D79.3030907@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 On 10/15/2010 04:22 AM, Jason Liu wrote: > Rename mx51 to mx5 in order to support more mx51 > like-style SOCs such as MX53 and the followings. > > Signed-off-by: Jason Liu Hi Jason, a little feedback. This patch is well-formed and I do not see the corruption problems as with the former one. However, the patch does not apply: Applying: IMX: rename mx51 to mx5 error: patch failed: arch/arm/include/asm/arch-mx51/sys_proto.h:24 error: arch/arm/include/asm/arch-mx51/sys_proto.h: patch does not apply error: patch failed: boards.cfg:46 error: boards.cfg: patch does not apply Patch failed at 0001 IMX: rename mx51 to mx5 Have you applied the patch on the current u-boot.git tree ? It seems you have to to rebase your patch. Please increment the version of your patch to allow everybody to track easier the changes. Something like [PATCH V2 1/1] makes the job. > @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ > * (C) Copyright 2007 > * Sascha Hauer, Pengutronix > * > - * (C) Copyright 2009 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. > + * (C) Copyright 2009-2010 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. I let someone with more legal experience as me to judge if this change is allowed or not. Normally, a new Copyright is added in case there is some important improvement that are not covered by the original file. In this case, only a define was changed (CONFIG_MX51_HCLK_FREQ -> CONFIG_HCLK_FREQ). > --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx51/soc.c > +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx5/soc.c > @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ > * (C) Copyright 2007 > * Sascha Hauer, Pengutronix > * > - * (C) Copyright 2009 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. > + * (C) Copyright 2009-2010 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. > * > * See file CREDITS for list of people who contributed to this > * project. > @@ -35,26 +35,25 @@ > > u32 get_cpu_rev(void) > { > - int reg; > - int system_rev; > + int system_rev = CONFIG_CPU_TYPE << 8; CONFIG_CPU_TYPE is a new CONFIG_ switch, that should be not needed. See my comments later. > diff --git a/boards.cfg b/boards.cfg > index 9226424..e144281 100644 > --- a/boards.cfg > +++ b/boards.cfg > @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ pm9263 arm arm926ejs - ronetix at91 > jadecpu arm arm926ejs jadecpu syteco mb86r0x > suen3 arm arm926ejs km_arm keymile kirkwood > rd6281a arm arm926ejs - Marvell kirkwood > -mx51evk arm armv7 mx51evk freescale mx51 > +mx51evk arm armv7 mx51evk freescale mx5 It makes sense to change other boards with MX51 inside this patch and not with a separate patch. So add changes for the other board, too. > diff --git a/include/configs/mx51evk.h b/include/configs/mx51evk.h > old mode 100644 > new mode 100755 > index 86a4731..363af3d > --- a/include/configs/mx51evk.h > +++ b/include/configs/mx51evk.h > @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ > /* > * Copyright (C) 2007, Guennadi Liakhovetski > * > - * (C) Copyright 2009 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. > + * (C) Copyright 2009-2010 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. > * > * Configuration settings for the MX51EVK Board > * > @@ -28,10 +28,11 @@ > /* High Level Configuration Options */ > > #define CONFIG_MX51 /* in a mx51 */ > +#define CONFIG_CPU_TYPE 51 Why do we have CONFIG_MX51 and CONFIG_CPU_TYPE ? It seems redundant. A board maintainer must set both and this makes no great sense. Can we derive CONFIG_CPU_TYPE (or its meaning) from CONFIG_MX51 when we need ? Best regards, Stefano Babic -- ===================================================================== DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: office at denx.de =====================================================================