From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: York Sun Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 08:02:21 -0700 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] configs: ls1021atwr: Enable ID EEPROM for SD boot In-Reply-To: <5624D080.9080009@writeme.com> References: <1442994506-39691-1-git-send-email-yao.yuan@freescale.com> <561EC761.2010504@freescale.com> <561FD704.3090309@freescale.com> <56200073.4020405@writeme.com> <5624D080.9080009@writeme.com> Message-ID: <562505FD.2060207@freescale.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 10/19/2015 04:14 AM, Sinan Akman wrote: > > Hi Yuan > > On 19/10/15 05:21 AM, Yao Yuan wrote: >> Hi Sinan Akman, >> >> Yes, I mean the Rev 1.0 silicon. >> Sorry, I can't guarantee that there aren't any boards with Rev1.0 silicon are in user's hands. >> Because we have also delivery very little board with Rev1.0 silicon to customer or developer for developing, assessing and verifying in the early stages. > > Thanks for the follow up on this, but I don't think that there were only > very few rev1.0 boards delivered. These were the boards bought from > distributor and during the time span of many weeks. > > I don't know the details and the impact of this patch exactly but > if the patch will break any rev1.0 board I don't think this would be > acceptable. There are definitely enough number of rev1.0 boards > made generally available (not specifically for early adapters etc) > that we should not break u-boot running on them. > >> Also we haven't support Rev1.0 in our SDK now. > > Sorry, but this is a bit irrelevant here. I'd expect u-boot mainline > does not necessarily follow what your SDK stops supporting. If > u-boot supported rev1.0 boards and if there are still many of > them out there I see no reason to break this. > Yuan, Please test the patch on rev 1.0 SoC and make changes if needed. This feature has been disabled for rev 1.0. York