[U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM AT91 new board EB+CPUx9K2

[Jens Scharsig]

Dear Wolfgang Denk
> Dear Jens Scharsig,
> 
 
> This is close. Of course we should drop the AT91_REG and use standard
> types instead, and "PIO_OER" is not a logal variable name either
> because it's all-capitals. So this entry should rather look like this:
> 
> 	...
> 	u32 pio_oer;
> 	...
>> and 
>>
>> #define AT91C_BASE_PIOC	((AT91PS_PIO)	0xFFFFF800) 
> 
> This is definitely deprecated.
> 
>> So the access should be 
>>
>> 	AT91PS_PIO pioa = AT91C_BASE_PIOA;
>> 	...
>> 	writel(AT91C_PA23_TXD2, &pioa->PIO_OER);
> 
> Yes, except for the incorrect variable name.
> 

By the way, the AT91RM9200.h. has hundreds of style problems.
This requires a complete revision of the AT91RM9200.h. 
I can try this, but will take a while and I can't test other
RM9200 boards.


Best regards,

Jens Scharsig