* [U-Boot] U-Boot build break for m501sk board from Artila
@ 2011-09-21 6:00 Sandeep Kumar
2011-09-21 6:17 ` Stefano Babic
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sandeep Kumar @ 2011-09-21 6:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Hi,
Did anybody face the issue which I am facing in building U-Boot for
m501sk board from Artila.
I am getting following error.
arm-none-eabi-gcc -g -Os -fno-common -ffixed-r8 -msoft-float
-D__KERNEL__ -DCONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE=0x21f00000
-I/media/disk/work/u-boot-2011.06_old2/include -fno-builtin
-ffreestanding -nostdinc -isystem
/home/sandeepk/CodeSourcery/Sourcery_G++_Lite/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-ea
bi/4.5.2/include -pipe -DCONFIG_ARM -D__ARM__ -marm -mabi=aapcs-linux
-mno-thumb-interwork -march=armv4 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes
-fno-stack-protector -o board.o board.c -c
board.c: In function '__dram_init_banksize':
board.c:233:29: error: 'CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE' undeclared (first use in
this function)
board.c:233:29: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once
for each function it appears in
board.c: In function 'board_init_f':
board.c:276:18: error: 'CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR' undeclared (first use
in this function)
board.c:309:9: error: 'CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE' undeclared (first use in
this function)
make[1]: *** [board.o] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory
`/media/disk/work/u-boot-2011.06_old2/arch/arm/lib'
make: *** [arch/arm/lib/libarm.o] Error 2
Regards,
Sandeep
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] U-Boot build break for m501sk board from Artila
2011-09-21 6:00 [U-Boot] U-Boot build break for m501sk board from Artila Sandeep Kumar
@ 2011-09-21 6:17 ` Stefano Babic
2011-09-27 3:06 ` Jamie
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stefano Babic @ 2011-09-21 6:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
On 09/21/2011 08:00 AM, Sandeep Kumar wrote:
> Hi,
>
Hi,
> Did anybody face the issue which I am facing in building U-Boot for
> m501sk board from Artila.
Not anymore. Because no one fixed this board in the last two years, the
board was removed from U-Boot mainline. It is not supported.
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
=====================================================================
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] U-Boot build break for m501sk board from Artila
2011-09-21 6:17 ` Stefano Babic
@ 2011-09-27 3:06 ` Jamie
2011-09-27 5:27 ` Wolfgang Denk
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jamie @ 2011-09-27 3:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Stefano Babic <sbabic <at> denx.de> writes:
>
> On 09/21/2011 08:00 AM, Sandeep Kumar wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
>
> Hi,
>
> > Did anybody face the issue which I am facing in building U-Boot for
> > m501sk board from Artila.
>
> Not anymore. Because no one fixed this board in the last two years, the
> board was removed from U-Boot mainline. It is not supported.
>
> Best regards,
> Stefano Babic
>
That's too bad. I've been developing for the board for the past 3 years and
only recently have been given the opportunity to re-examine the loader and root
file system.
I was super excited that U-Boot supported the board. For about 5 minutes.
Those interested might find this patch of use. I won't be able to test it for a
few days. Applied to the "v2011.06" tag (git checkout v2011.06).
<snip>
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-at91/hardware.h
b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-at91/hardware.h
index 36af571..4faa072 100644
--- a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-at91/hardware.h
+++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-at91/hardware.h
@@ -25,22 +25,22 @@
#define __ASM_ARM_ARCH_HARDWARE_H__
#if defined(CONFIG_AT91RM9200)
-# include <asm/arch/at91rm9200.h>
+# include <asm/arch-at91/at91rm9200.h>
#elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9260) || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G20) || \
defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9XE)
-# include <asm/arch/at91sam9260.h>
+# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9260.h>
#elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9261) || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G10)
-# include <asm/arch/at91sam9261.h>
+# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9261.h>
#elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9263)
-# include <asm/arch/at91sam9263.h>
+# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9263.h>
#elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9RL)
-# include <asm/arch/at91sam9rl.h>
+# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9rl.h>
#elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G45) || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9M10G45)
-# include <asm/arch/at91sam9g45.h>
+# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9g45.h>
#elif defined(CONFIG_AT91CAP9)
-# include <asm/arch/at91cap9.h>
+# include <asm/arch-at91/at91cap9.h>
#elif defined(CONFIG_AT91X40)
-# include <asm/arch/at91x40.h>
+# include <asm/arch-at91/at91x40.h>
#else
# error "Unsupported AT91 processor"
#endif
diff --git a/include/configs/m501sk.h b/include/configs/m501sk.h
index 68f0415..55b9154 100644
--- a/include/configs/m501sk.h
+++ b/include/configs/m501sk.h
@@ -162,7 +162,9 @@
#define CONFIG_NR_DRAM_BANKS 1
#define PHYS_SDRAM 0x20000000
-#define PHYS_SDRAM_SIZE 0x2000000 /* 32 megs */
+#define PHYS_SDRAM_SIZE 0x4000000 /* 64 megs */
+#define CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE PHYS_SDRAM
+#define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR (PHYS_SDRAM + (PHYS_SDRAM_SIZE >> 13))
#define CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_START 0x21000000 /* PHYS_SDRAM */
/* CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_START + PHYS_SDRAM_SIZE - 262144 */
<snap>
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] U-Boot build break for m501sk board from Artila
2011-09-27 3:06 ` Jamie
@ 2011-09-27 5:27 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-09-27 13:40 ` Jamie Risk
2011-09-27 19:24 ` Jamie Risk
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Wolfgang Denk @ 2011-09-27 5:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Dear Jamie,
In message <loom.20110927T050021-301@post.gmane.org> you wrote:
>
> > Not anymore. Because no one fixed this board in the last two years, the
> > board was removed from U-Boot mainline. It is not supported.
...
> That's too bad. I've been developing for the board for the past 3 years and
> only recently have been given the opportunity to re-examine the loader and root
> file system.
It would be trivial to re-add the board if there is someone who
actively maintains the related code.
> #if defined(CONFIG_AT91RM9200)
> -# include <asm/arch/at91rm9200.h>
> +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91rm9200.h>
> #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9260) || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G20) || \
> defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9XE)
> -# include <asm/arch/at91sam9260.h>
> +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9260.h>
> #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9261) || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G10)
> -# include <asm/arch/at91sam9261.h>
> +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9261.h>
> #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9263)
> -# include <asm/arch/at91sam9263.h>
> +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9263.h>
> #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9RL)
> -# include <asm/arch/at91sam9rl.h>
> +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9rl.h>
> #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G45) || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9M10G45)
> -# include <asm/arch/at91sam9g45.h>
> +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9g45.h>
> #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91CAP9)
> -# include <asm/arch/at91cap9.h>
> +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91cap9.h>
> #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91X40)
> -# include <asm/arch/at91x40.h>
> +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91x40.h>
All these modifications are bogus and should be removed. They are not
needed either.
> diff --git a/include/configs/m501sk.h b/include/configs/m501sk.h
> index 68f0415..55b9154 100644
> --- a/include/configs/m501sk.h
> +++ b/include/configs/m501sk.h
> @@ -162,7 +162,9 @@
>
> #define CONFIG_NR_DRAM_BANKS 1
> #define PHYS_SDRAM 0x20000000
> -#define PHYS_SDRAM_SIZE 0x2000000 /* 32 megs */
> +#define PHYS_SDRAM_SIZE 0x4000000 /* 64 megs */
> +#define CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE PHYS_SDRAM
> +#define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR (PHYS_SDRAM + (PHYS_SDRAM_SIZE >> 13))
This is a highly cryptic way to say "+ 8192" - is there any rationale
for such an unreadable way to express this?
> #define CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_START 0x21000000 /* PHYS_SDRAM */
> /* CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_START + PHYS_SDRAM_SIZE - 262144 */
Hm - after reverting commit b1a2bd4 and then applying your patches, I
still get:
Configuring for m501sk board...
make[1]: *** No targets specified and no makefile found. Stop.
make: *** [arch/arm/cpu/arm920t/at91rm9200/libat91rm9200.o] Error 2
Sorry, this does not work.
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 connection between the language in which we think/program and the
problems and solutions we can imagine is very close. For this reason
restricting language features with the intent of eliminating pro-
grammer errors is at best dangerous.
- Bjarne Stroustrup in "The C++ Programming Language"
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] U-Boot build break for m501sk board from Artila
2011-09-27 5:27 ` Wolfgang Denk
@ 2011-09-27 13:40 ` Jamie Risk
2011-09-27 19:24 ` Jamie Risk
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jamie Risk @ 2011-09-27 13:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
On 27 September 2011 01:27, Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de> wrote:
> Dear Jamie,
>
> In message <loom.20110927T050021-301@post.gmane.org> you wrote:
> >
> > > Not anymore. Because no one fixed this board in the last two years, the
> > > board was removed from U-Boot mainline. It is not supported.
> ...
> > That's too bad. I've been developing for the board for the past 3 years
> and
> > only recently have been given the opportunity to re-examine the loader
> and root
> > file system.
>
> It would be trivial to re-add the board if there is someone who
> actively maintains the related code.
>
I reverted 'v2011.06-0-gb1af6f5' without knowing the support had been taken
away (I saw
"m501sk" in boards.cfg.) It was only after I made some changes that I found
this thread.
If I'm successful, I can post changes, and could take on support, but if
you're not getting
any pull for M501 cards is it worth it?
> > #if defined(CONFIG_AT91RM9200)
> > -# include <asm/arch/at91rm9200.h>
> > +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91rm9200.h>
> > #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9260) || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G20) || \
> > defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9XE)
> > -# include <asm/arch/at91sam9260.h>
> > +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9260.h>
> > #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9261) || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G10)
> > -# include <asm/arch/at91sam9261.h>
> > +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9261.h>
> > #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9263)
> > -# include <asm/arch/at91sam9263.h>
> > +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9263.h>
> > #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9RL)
> > -# include <asm/arch/at91sam9rl.h>
> > +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9rl.h>
> > #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G45) || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9M10G45)
> > -# include <asm/arch/at91sam9g45.h>
> > +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9g45.h>
> > #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91CAP9)
> > -# include <asm/arch/at91cap9.h>
> > +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91cap9.h>
> > #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91X40)
> > -# include <asm/arch/at91x40.h>
> > +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91x40.h>
>
> All these modifications are bogus and should be removed. They are not
> needed either.
>
Is the configuration meant to create a symbolic link (asm/arch ->
asm/arch-at91)?
If so I'll have to investigate how the make works. Without the above
changes I get the error:
/u-boot/include/asm/arch-at91/hardware.h:28:34: error:
asm/arch/at91rm9200.h: No such file or directory
It seemed harmless enough to change the "hardware.h" file as it itself is
located
in the "arch-at91" directory.
> > diff --git a/include/configs/m501sk.h b/include/configs/m501sk.h
> > index 68f0415..55b9154 100644
> > --- a/include/configs/m501sk.h
> > +++ b/include/configs/m501sk.h
> > @@ -162,7 +162,9 @@
> >
> > #define CONFIG_NR_DRAM_BANKS 1
> > #define PHYS_SDRAM 0x20000000
> > -#define PHYS_SDRAM_SIZE 0x2000000 /* 32 megs */
> > +#define PHYS_SDRAM_SIZE 0x4000000 /* 64 megs */
> > +#define CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE PHYS_SDRAM
> > +#define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR (PHYS_SDRAM + (PHYS_SDRAM_SIZE >>
> 13))
>
> This is a highly cryptic way to say "+ 8192" - is there any rationale
> for such an unreadable way to express this?
>
Okay ... fair enough.
> > #define CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_START 0x21000000 /* PHYS_SDRAM */
> > /* CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_START + PHYS_SDRAM_SIZE - 262144 */
>
> Hm - after reverting commit b1a2bd4 and then applying your patches, I
> still get:
>
> Configuring for m501sk board...
> make[1]: *** No targets specified and no makefile found. Stop.
> make: *** [arch/arm/cpu/arm920t/at91rm9200/libat91rm9200.o] Error 2
>
> Sorry, this does not work.
>
>
I get the error when I revert to b1a2bd4 too, but the patch above I applied
the to b1af6f5.
The commands I did in order were:
~/$ git clone git://git.denx.de/u-boot.git && cd u-boot
~/$ git checkout b1af6f5
~/$ patch -p1 < ../my-m501sk.patch
~/$ make m501sk_config
~/$ make all
I'm not@a computer with a working linker, but the build goes through
until the final "arm-...-ld" linker
line.
- Jamie
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] U-Boot build break for m501sk board from Artila
2011-09-27 5:27 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-09-27 13:40 ` Jamie Risk
@ 2011-09-27 19:24 ` Jamie Risk
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jamie Risk @ 2011-09-27 19:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
On 27 September 2011 01:27, Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de> wrote:
>
> > #if defined(CONFIG_AT91RM9200)
> > -# include <asm/arch/at91rm9200.h>
> > +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91rm9200.h>
> > #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9260) || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G20) || \
> > defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9XE)
> > -# include <asm/arch/at91sam9260.h>
> > +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9260.h>
> > #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9261) || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G10)
> > -# include <asm/arch/at91sam9261.h>
> > +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9261.h>
> > #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9263)
> > -# include <asm/arch/at91sam9263.h>
> > +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9263.h>
> > #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9RL)
> > -# include <asm/arch/at91sam9rl.h>
> > +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9rl.h>
> > #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G45) || defined(CONFIG_AT91SAM9M10G45)
> > -# include <asm/arch/at91sam9g45.h>
> > +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91sam9g45.h>
> > #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91CAP9)
> > -# include <asm/arch/at91cap9.h>
> > +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91cap9.h>
> > #elif defined(CONFIG_AT91X40)
> > -# include <asm/arch/at91x40.h>
> > +# include <asm/arch-at91/at91x40.h>
>
> All these modifications are bogus and should be removed. They
> are not needed either.
The bogusity of the above modifications come from my confusion -
there are two include files:
./arch/arm/include/asm/arch-at91/at91rm9200.h
./arch/arm/include/asm/arch-at91rm9200/AT91RM9200.h
which have overlapping interests in defining the memory mapped
registers (one for c and the other for asm) it would seem.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-09-27 19:24 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-09-21 6:00 [U-Boot] U-Boot build break for m501sk board from Artila Sandeep Kumar
2011-09-21 6:17 ` Stefano Babic
2011-09-27 3:06 ` Jamie
2011-09-27 5:27 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-09-27 13:40 ` Jamie Risk
2011-09-27 19:24 ` Jamie Risk
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox