[U-Boot-Users] [Patch]IntegratorAP & CP multi core module support

[U-Boot-Users] [Patch]IntegratorAP & CP multi core module support

[Peter Pearse]

Hi
      Attached a patch to allow users to specify the core module fitted
to their integrator board.

Please inform me of any defects found. 

CHANGELOG:
* Patch by Peter Pearse, 2 Feb 2005
  - add core module targets
  - add ARM946E cpu support
  - remap memory to 0x00000000

Notes
-----
a) Provides targets for all supported Core Modules
- targets are of the form integrator<type>_CM<id>_config Examples 
	make integratorap_CM946E_S
	make integratorcp_CM920T_config

b) Previous targets integegratorcp, integratorap retained.

c) Tested to build with 
	MAKEALL arm (trab & omap2420h fail)
	integratorcp
	integratorcp_CM926EJ_S_config
	integratorcp_CM966E_S_config

d) Tested to boot linux & save environment on Integrator/CP CM926EJ-S in
all three boot combinations
	Run ARM Boot Monitor then manually run U-Boot from user flash 
	Run ARM Boot Monitor, auto-switch to   U-Boot from user flash
	Run U-Boot direct from user flash i.e. NO ARM Boot Monitor

e) Patched against head at 2 Feb 2005

f) Based on the patches submitted by::
- Shawn Jin (arm946e)
- Jean-Paul Saman (remap)

Regards
Peter
------------------------ Peter.Pearse at arm.com
-------------------------


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: multicore.patch.bz2
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 19305 bytes
Desc: multicore.patch.bz2
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20050202/dbff8715/attachment.obj 

[U-Boot-Users] [Patch]IntegratorAP & CP multi core module support

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <89A528FE6DB0FA44877BB2F05B84671801C12D3C@ZIPPY.Emea.Arm.com> you wrote:
> 
>       Attached a patch to allow users to specify the core module fitted
> to their integrator board.
...
> f) Based on the patches submitted by::
> - Shawn Jin (arm946e)
> - Jean-Paul Saman (remap)

Can you please indicate which exact  patches  you  are  referring  to
(date,  subject)? Does this mean that the original patches, as far as
not merged into the main tree yet, can be considered as obsolete?

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
Software Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
Computers make excellent and efficient servants, but I have  no  wish
to  serve under them. Captain, a starship also runs on loyalty to one
man. And nothing can replace it or him.
	-- Spock, "The Ultimate Computer", stardate 4729.4

[U-Boot-Users] [Patch]IntegratorAP & CP multi core module support

[Shawn Jin]

Peter,

> a) Provides targets for all supported Core Modules
> - targets are of the form integrator<type>_CM<id>_config
> Examples
>        make integratorap_CM946E_S

This target does't follow the format integrator<type>_CM<id>_config.
It's annoying if there are too many underscores in target names. It's
good to follow uboot convention of target names, i.e., <board>_config.
So shall we use integratorap_CM946ES_config?

> c) Tested to build with
>        MAKEALL arm (trab & omap2420h fail)
>        integratorcp

Here it's integratorcp_config

>        integratorcp_CM926EJ_S_config

integratorcp_CM926EJS_config

>        integratorcp_CM966E_S_config

integratorcp_CM966ES_config

Just my 2 cents.

-Shawn.

[U-Boot-Users] [Patch]IntegratorAP & CP multi core module support

[Peter Pearse]

Shawn Jin wrote:
> This target does't follow the format integrator<type>_CM<id>_config.
> It's annoying if there are too many underscores in target names. It's
> good to follow uboot convention of target names, i.e.,

Shawn
	Just trying to keep to the official ARM ids, until I was
defeated by 
gnumake's distaste for '-'.

As long as each CM is unique....

Altho I dislike having to remember several (slighly different)
names for the same thing - long live Occam's razor.

Regards 

Peter

[U-Boot-Users] [Patch]IntegratorAP & CP multi core module support

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <89A528FE6DB0FA44877BB2F05B84671801C12D3C@ZIPPY.Emea.Arm.com> you wrote:
> 
> Please inform me of any defects found. 

See below :-(

> CHANGELOG:
> * Patch by Peter Pearse, 2 Feb 2005
>   - add core module targets
>   - add ARM946E cpu support
>   - remap memory to 0x00000000

I finally added this patch, but just because it's been  on  my  queue
for so long without any real progress. I hope this is the easiest way
to get things going.

But PLEASE don't even think of submitting such a monster again.


Most of your files violate the Coding Style.  Trailing  white  space,
indentation, etc.

What you do tho the Makefile is horror. Adding 170+ lines just for  a
few  boards?  There  should  be  a  cleaner  way!  Please  provide  a
(incremental) patch to get rid  of  this  mess!  The  Makefile  is  a
Makefile, and no place to add hundrets of lines of source code.

Your board config names are unacceptable. "integratorcp_CM922T_XA10".
Who is supposed  to  type  something  like  this?  Please  provide  a
(incremental) patch to use sensible, *much* shorter names. Instead of
"integratorcp_CM922T_XA10"   it   should   be   sufficient  to  write
"cm922t_xa10", right?

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
Software Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
In C we had to code our own bugs, in C++ we can inherit them.

[U-Boot-Users] [Patch]IntegratorAP & CP multi core module support

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <89A528FE6DB0FA44877BB2F05B84671801C12D3C@ZIPPY.Emea.Arm.com> you wrote:
> 
> Please inform me of any defects found. 

Build for the following boards is broken:

integratorap_CM920T:

	cpu/arm920t/start.o(.text+0xf0):/.automount/castor-vlab/root/home/wd/git/u-boot/work/cpu/arm920t/start.S:265: undefined reference to `lowlevel_init'

integratorcp_CM920T:

	cpu/arm920t/start.o(.text+0xf0):/.automount/castor-vlab/root/home/wd/git/u-boot/work/cpu/arm920t/start.S:265: undefined reference to `lowlevel_init'

> > CHANGELOG:
> > * Patch by Peter Pearse, 2 Feb 2005
> >   - add core module targets
> >   - add ARM946E cpu support
> >   - remap memory to 0x00000000

Please provide (incremental) patch.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
Software Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
A day without sunshine is like night.

[U-Boot-Users] [Patch]IntegratorAP & CP multi core module support

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <89A528FE6DB0FA44877BB2F05B84671801C12D3C@ZIPPY.Emea.Arm.com> you wrote:
> 
> Please inform me of any defects found. 


AAAAARRRGGGHHHH!!!!!!


> > > CHANGELOG:
> > > * Patch by Peter Pearse, 2 Feb 2005
> > >   - add core module targets
> > >   - add ARM946E cpu support
> > >   - remap memory to 0x00000000

Your make rules overwrite source files!!!!

I just corrupted the repository because you modify board/*/u-boot.lds

This is UNACCEPTABLE!!!

Please clean up your build mess ASAP. I am not going to tolerate this
for long. Please provide a patch, or I'll back out this whole crap.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
Software Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
If something is different, it's either better or worse,  and  usually
both.                                                    - Larry Wall

[U-Boot-Users] [Patch]IntegratorAP & CP multi core module support

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <89A528FE6DB0FA44877BB2F05B84671801C12EB6@ZIPPY.Emea.Arm.com> you wrote:
>
> 	Just trying to keep to the official ARM ids, until I was
> defeated by 
> gnumake's distaste for '-'.

Please let the official ARM ids be what they are, but  use  readable,
and typable, names in U-Boot. The current names are a PITA.

> Altho I dislike having to remember several (slighly different)
> names for the same thing - long live Occam's razor.

See my previous message. Short names are MUCH easier to remember :-)

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
Software Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux
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"