[U-Boot] [PATCH 5/9] openrisc: Add board info printout to cmd_bdinfo

[Marek Vasut]

> Signed-off-by: Stefan Kristiansson <stefan.kristiansson at saunalahti.fi>
> ---
>  common/cmd_bdinfo.c |   22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/common/cmd_bdinfo.c b/common/cmd_bdinfo.c
> index 688b238..1cd69b5 100644
> --- a/common/cmd_bdinfo.c
> +++ b/common/cmd_bdinfo.c
> @@ -460,6 +460,28 @@ int do_bdinfo(cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc,
> char * const argv[]) return 0;
>  }
> 
> +#elif defined(CONFIG_OPENRISC)
> +
> +int do_bdinfo(cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char * const argv[])
> +{
> +	bd_t *bd = gd->bd;
> +
> +	print_num("mem start",		(ulong)bd->bi_memstart);
> +	print_lnum("mem size",		(u64)bd->bi_memsize);
> +	print_num("flash start",	(ulong)bd->bi_flashstart);
> +	print_num("flash size",		(ulong)bd->bi_flashsize);
> +	print_num("flash offset",	(ulong)bd->bi_flashoffset);
> +
> +#if defined(CONFIG_CMD_NET)
> +	print_eth(0);
> +	printf("ip_addr     = %pI4\n", &bd->bi_ip_addr);
> +#endif
> +
> +	printf("baudrate    = %ld bps\n", bd->bi_baudrate);

Would consistent format of the printed data be a problem ? ;-)

> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>  #else
>   #error "a case for this architecture does not exist!"
>  #endif