[U-Boot-Users] MPC8349EMDS port

Kumar Gala galak at kernel.crashing.org
Fri Apr 7 16:12:27 CEST 2006

On Apr 7, 2006, at 5:35 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:

> Dear Kumar,
> in message  
> <F74FD79C-8F46-4465-93FB-54ADA4D017BC at kernel.crashing.org> you wrote:
>> Any update on this?
> Sorry for the delay...

No problem.  I figured removing a second board port for the same HW  
would be a good thing :)

>>> I was looking at merging the EMDS and ADS ports for MPC834x and was
>>> wondering about a few things:
>>> * EMDS has TEXT_BASE @ 0xFE000000, and ADS at 0xFE700000 where do
>>> you end up programming u-boot at? (for example what is the flash
>>> command you use to reprogram a u-boot image on the board).
> We use exactly this address 0xFE000000, here is a command:
> protect off FE000000 +${filesize}; era FE000000 +${filesize}; cp.b  
> 100000 FE000000 ${filesize}

Where do you have the HW Config words coming from (BCSR, FLASH, ..)?   
When I use TEXT_BASE @ 0xFE000000 my system doesn't boot, I'll try  
out the command you suggest and see what happens.

>>> * I had to rework the BATs to be able to cover everything properly
>>> which also meant moving a few things around.
>>> CFG_BCSR 0xF8000000 -> 0xE2400000
>>> CFG_INIT_RAM_ADDR 0xE8000000 -> 0xFD000000
>>> This is so we can fit everything into the 8 BATS and maintain
>>> proper WIMG settings.
>>> If you can explain the TEXT_BASE difference and how that works out
>>> and are ok with the changing of CFG_BCSR and CFG_INIT_RAM_ADDR then
>>> I'll push some patches to merge ADS & MDS, remove ADS, and we get
>>> PCI support on EMDS out of it.
> These selection of addresses was made by a customer  in  his  initial
> patch. I think the customer was trying to follow the memory map which
> is  defined  in  the  board  User's Manual. And we just didn't change
> that. But I think that moving things around as you suggest should  be
> fine as well.

I'll make this change then.

- kumar

More information about the U-Boot mailing list