[U-Boot] about at91 board in uboot

[U-Boot] about at91 board in uboot

[Reinhard Meyer]

Dear Lin,
> The following is the status XU Hong is reporting to me on u-boot-atmel/master.  
> I saw it has been silent for 2 days. I don?t know if we could do something to help maintain all the boards.
> I will try to help allocate some of my people to handling missing parts for our EK.

I send a message about 2 days ago, asking that the SoC relevant parts are changed in a manner
consistent with the changes for the 9260, like in
at91sam9260_devices.c, at91sam9260.h, at91sam9260_matrix.h.

Once that is done, and added to u-boot-atmel/master, the board specific
patches should be rebased on that and submitted.

Since nobody did volunteer so far, I was going to edit the SoC specific parts and submit them,
but unfortunately that could take some time (until next week maybe, I was going to start today
with that, but have paid work to finish as well :) )

I am not fond of quick and dirty solutions here,
the boards are not going to be removed with this u-boot release,
but will be after if no progress is seen - but we do have progress here - so no need to panic.

So lets do it in two distinct steps:
1. fix SoCs
2. fix boards

> 9261 soc & ek have been merged to atmel branch.
> 9rl ? v3 patches have been pushed out just now and shall be ok.
> 9263 ? soc part has been merged into atmel branch. I?m asking the ek part.
> 9g45 -  patches were sent by 3rd party.

The SoC specific changes will/should be based before those patches, and will
replace the current ones.

---

Original Message:

Dear Friends,

I have received several different patches reworking

"at91sam*_devices.c"

and

"at91sam9*.h".

Lokking at them, none of them is completely done the way the files for
at91sam9260 are done.

Examples:

9260, 9263: ATMEL_ID_USART0
9261: ATMEL_ID_US0

9260 uses the CONFIG_AT91_GPIO_PULLUP define, the others do not.

9261 still uses the CONFIG_USARTx defines.

Please have a look at at91sam9260 as a reference.

We do need a properly fixed SoC port for 9261, 9263 and the others
before individual board ports can be fixed.

Just because there is a sudden rush to get things fixed for the next release
should NOT tempt us to get in interim versions.

With Best Regards,
Reinhard

[U-Boot] about at91 board in uboot

[Hong Xu]

Hi Reinhard,
On 06/17/2011 03:17 PM, Reinhard Meyer wrote:
> Dear Lin,
>> The following is the status XU Hong is reporting to me on u-boot-atmel/master.
>> I saw it has been silent for 2 days. I don?t know if we could do something to help maintain all the boards.
>> I will try to help allocate some of my people to handling missing parts for our EK.
>
> I send a message about 2 days ago, asking that the SoC relevant parts are changed in a manner
> consistent with the changes for the 9260, like in
> at91sam9260_devices.c, at91sam9260.h, at91sam9260_matrix.h.

Yes, we noticed that. And the patches we sent out are divided into 2 
parts, one for SoC and one for EK (boards).

We noticed the SoC part of SAM9263 has been merged, but EK part is not. 
I've already sent out an email about this but no response yet.

For SAM9RL, V3 patches (SoC part and EK part) have been sent out days 
ago according to your comments. But, no response yet.

We're sure we can not totally 100% understand all of your concerns. But 
we can talk with the code and finally reach the same point.

Thanks for your understanding.

BR,
Hong

> Once that is done, and added to u-boot-atmel/master, the board specific
> patches should be rebased on that and submitted.
>
> Since nobody did volunteer so far, I was going to edit the SoC specific parts and submit them,
> but unfortunately that could take some time (until next week maybe, I was going to start today
> with that, but have paid work to finish as well :) )
>
> I am not fond of quick and dirty solutions here,
> the boards are not going to be removed with this u-boot release,
> but will be after if no progress is seen - but we do have progress here - so no need to panic.
>
> So lets do it in two distinct steps:
> 1. fix SoCs
> 2. fix boards
>
>> 9261 soc&  ek have been merged to atmel branch.
>> 9rl ? v3 patches have been pushed out just now and shall be ok.
>> 9263 ? soc part has been merged into atmel branch. I?m asking the ek part.
>> 9g45 -  patches were sent by 3rd party.
>
> The SoC specific changes will/should be based before those patches, and will
> replace the current ones.
>
> ---
>
> Original Message:
>
> Dear Friends,
>
> I have received several different patches reworking
>
> "at91sam*_devices.c"
>
> and
>
> "at91sam9*.h".
>
> Lokking at them, none of them is completely done the way the files for
> at91sam9260 are done.
>
> Examples:
>
> 9260, 9263: ATMEL_ID_USART0
> 9261: ATMEL_ID_US0
>
> 9260 uses the CONFIG_AT91_GPIO_PULLUP define, the others do not.
>
> 9261 still uses the CONFIG_USARTx defines.
>
> Please have a look at at91sam9260 as a reference.
>
> We do need a properly fixed SoC port for 9261, 9263 and the others
> before individual board ports can be fixed.
>
> Just because there is a sudden rush to get things fixed for the next release
> should NOT tempt us to get in interim versions.
>
> With Best Regards,
> Reinhard