From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eric Nelson <eric.nelson@boundarydevices.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 06:48:05 -0700
Subject: [U-Boot] [PULL] : Please pull u-boot-imx -- 3 build failures
In-Reply-To: <51419A86.5070506@denx.de>
References: <51403C42.6010100@denx.de> <20130313132955.09d142b5@lilith>
	<20130313232654.3a6b2c64@lilith>
	<5140FF7F.4030007@boundarydevices.com>
	<CAOMZO5BuGaJ8GjQHLoWDOGwW-MUaRLK_jhxTuXkbNU0WwKV_aw@mail.gmail.com>
	<51410121.2000605@boundarydevices.com>
	<CAOMZO5DEdHnBRqhiig53PPTMxG6Sys5sW+o6_d8USp0mMNJ-cg@mail.gmail.com>
	<51410271.9080502@boundarydevices.com> <51419A86.5070506@denx.de>
Message-ID: <5141D515.2070804@boundarydevices.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On 03/14/2013 02:38 AM, Stefano Babic wrote:
> On 13/03/2013 23:49, Eric Nelson wrote:
>
>>> Yes, but I used (ulong) instead.
>>>
>>> Would it be OK?
>>>
>>
>> Works for me...
>>
>> Note that Troy wanted to see DDR_MB expressed as bytes instead,
>> which would have solved the overflow problem.
>
> Ok, I sent also a fix, but I will wait for Troy's patch.
>

Troy wasn't planning a patch.

His comments were verbal and I may have convinced him that
it is easier to understand and validate correctness of
	DDR_MB=1024
than
	DDR_SIZE=1073741824

And I don't think anyone will be building an i.MX6-based
board whose RAM size isn't an even multiple of a megabyte.

Regards,


Eric