[U-Boot-Users] ixdp465 support
cloud.of.andor at gmail.com
Wed Nov 15 10:22:51 CET 2006
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <455994C6.7050803 at gandalf.sssup.it> you wrote:
>> since we didn't have enough spare time to prepare a clean patch for
>> the IXDP465 support, we decided to put the current patch on our website
>> The patch is released under GPL license.
> It is *extremely* bad style to post the same information with slightly
> different text to different mailing lists.
My apologies: I recently moved from an email client to another one and I
Of course, it's a bad style. Sorry.
> Here is a copy of my reply to Claudio Scordino's posting on the
> linux-arm list:
> ------- Forwarded Message
> Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 21:49:51 +0100
> From: Wolfgang Denk <wd at denx.de>
> To: Claudio Scordino <cloud.of.andor at gmail.com>
> cc: Arm Linux <linux-arm at lists.arm.linux.org.uk>
> Subject: Re: U-boot on Intel IXDP465
> In message <4559CB56.1060504 at gmail.com> you wrote:
>> Evidence Srl has just finished the porting of the U-boot bootloader to
>> the Intel IXDP465 development platform (featuring a Intel IXP465 Xscale
>> microprocessor). The patch adds the support for the microprocessor, the
> So why don't you post it to the appropirate mailing list, i. e.
> u-boot-users? It's off topic here.
> Note 1: the resulting binary cannot be distributed, as you have a
> license conflict with the Intel NPE code. You MUST NOT link
> U-Boot (under GPL) with this code.
Our idea is to release the patch *without* the Intel Microcode, so that
the patch can be released under GPL license.
Clearly, once you copy the Microcode (which is not GPL) and compile, the
resulting binary is not GPL, due to Intel's license.
But it wouldn't be in any case...
> Note 2: your patch contains garbage; for example, it creates files
> like Makefile.orig, cpu/ixp/cpu.c.orig,
> cpu/ixp/interrupts.c.orig, cpu/ixp/serial.c.orig,
> cpu/ixp/timer.c.orig, drivers/pci_indirect.c.orig,
> cpu/ixp/config.mk.orig, ... which must not be included.
> Also, pippo.txt is poroibably random garbage and should not
> be included.
As I said, we are experiencing a very busy period, and we didn't have
enough time to properly clear the patch and submit it on the u-boot
mailing list. We know that the patch is still very dirty. That's why we
didn't ask to put it in the U-boot mainstream. But we wanted to release
this alpha version on our website because someone may be interested. In
the next weeks we'll provide a clean version of the patch.
> Note 3: For CFI conformant flash chips you should use the CFI driver
> instead of a custom one.
If I'm not wrong, IXP425 uses a custom driver too. That's why we chose
to go for a custom driver.
> Note 4: Your patch violates the coding style (C++ comments,
> trailing white space, indentation not by TABs, etc.). Please
We'll fix this.
BTW, why indentation should not done by TABs ? In the Linux kernel code
the use of TABs is mandatory...
> Note 5: You patch adds debug code to common files (like
> common/cmd_bootm.c). You must never do this!
> Note 6: Please doin;t add changelog style comments to files (like in
> cpu/ixp/start.S); we use git to track the history.
> Note 7: Please don't modify white space in files which you don't
> touch at all (like drivers/cfi_flash.c).
> Note 8: Be careful with hardware accesses; code like function
> get_reg() in drivers/ethixdp465.c is missing "volatile"
> attributes. Check all your code for this!
We'll fix all these issues.
> So please clean up your code, fix the license issue, and (re-) submit
> your code on u-boot-users.
Ok. I don't know exactly when the final patch will be ready. In the
meanwhile we put a new version (slightly better) on the same URL for
those people that can't wait the final version.
Embedded Real-Time solutions
More information about the U-Boot