[U-Boot-Users] Spectacularly Weird U-Boot Behavior w/NE2000

[Chuck Meade]

Hi Craig,

> I have incorporated Christian's NE2000 driver for PCMCIA, and have 
> configured it for my PXA255 custom board according to his instructions 
> and the instructions in the README.PXA_CF in /doc.  I am have had some 
> success with this - and an amazing problem.

...(snipped)

> Wonderful.  But now, after doing the ping, u-boot's "view" of flash 
> memory gets corrupted.  For example, look at this:
> 
> $ md 80000
> 00080000: 56190080 65070080 40300080 18670080    ...V...e..0 at ..g.
> 00080010: 00000080 00000080 dfc00080 00020080    ................
> 00080020: 2e340080 762d0080 2d310080 31610080    ..4...-v..1-..a1
> 00080030: 52450080 41440080 72650080 006c0080    ..ER..DA..er..l.
> 00080040: e1a00080 e1a00080 e1a00080 e1a00080    ................
> 00080050: e1a00080 e1a00080 e1a00080 e1a00080    ................
> 00080060: ea000080 016f0080 00000080 000b0080    ......o.........
> 00080070: e1a00080 e3a00080 e10f0080 e3120080    ................
> 00080080: 1a000080 e3a00080 ef120080 e10f0080    ................
> 00080090: e3820080 e1210080 e3cf0080 e2820080    ......!.........
> 000800a0: e4920080 e1320080 1aff0080 ee070080    ......2.........
> 000800b0: ee070080 ee110080 e3c00080 e3c00080    ................
> 000800c0: ee010080 e3a00080 00000080 00000080    ................
> 000800d0: 00000080 00000080 00000080 00000080    ................
> 000800e0: e28f0080 e8900080 e0500080 e3300080    ..........P...0.
> 000800f0: 0a000080 e0850080 e0860080 e08c0080    ................
> 
> Notice how the high-order 16 bits of each long word are always "0080"?  
> This is completely bogus.  However, flash has not actually been 
> corrupted.  If I do a reset, and then do an "md 8000", everything is 
> perfectly right.

You mean "md 80000" right?  You had 80000 above, now you say 8000.

If that is not the issue (and I am sure it is just a typo), then it
sounds as if you have 2 flash devices, 16 bits wide each, making up
these 32-bit words.  And it looks like the low-order 16-bits from
flash are reporting flash status rather than flash data.  Flash commands
that are improperly finished (not completed) by putting the flash back
into "read data" mode can leave the flash reporting its status instead
of returning its data contents.

Just something to check.  But the fact that a reset clears up the problem
says that I am probably right, since the flash data is actually still
there -- the reset puts the flash back into "read data" mode.

Tell us what happens.
Chuck