[U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] FreeScale MC68360 support
Matvejchikov Ilya
matvejchikov at gmail.com
Wed Apr 11 21:58:12 CEST 2007
2007/4/9, Wolfgang Denk <wd at denx.de>:
>
> Dear Ilya,
>
> in message <8496f91a0704080420m1e72900cn70116c3dc7973b2b at mail.gmail.com>
> you wrote:
> >
> > This patch adds support for MC68360 based board for u-boot-1.1.6. Mail
> me if
> > you have any questions :)
>
> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but MC68360 is not the name of a
> board, but of the Freescale (resp. ex Motorola) QICC CPU. There are
> many different boards using this processor, so you will have to chose
> a more descriptive board name.
Yes, you are right. MC68360 is the name of the CPU. But the board I'm
working
at right now is my own design. That's why I can't do it.
Also, U-Boot 1.1.6 is outdated. Please submit your patch against a
> recent version of U-Boot (i. e. top of tree in git repository, or at
> least release 1.2.0).
Ooops, I was not aware of it. As far as I know, there was no official
information about it.
Then, there are some coding style issues with your patch (indentation
> not by TAB, indentation not by multiple of 8 columns, trailing white
> space, C++ comments, too long lines, etc.) as well as other formal
> issues (missing Copyright entries, missing license headers, missing
> Signed-off-by: line).
Ok. Could you tell me where I can get exact information about it?
It seems you use a private flash driver for a device that looks as if
> it was CFI conformant. Please explain why you cannot use the CFI
> driver instead.
This is because I have old non-CFI flash chips :(
I also wonder if you really need a new ethernet driver
> (cpu/mc68360/enet.c) and a new serial driver (cpu/mc68360/serial.c) -
> IIRC the CPM on the 360 is mostly compatible (with very few minor
> deviations that can be handled easily) to the CPM on the PowerQICC I
> (= MPC8xx) processors. I think most of this could could (and should)
> be shared? The same holds for some other files like for example
> include/asm-m68k/arch-mc68360/commproc.h which is highly redundand
> with the MPC8xx commproc.h
I don't know this processors family well enough, but I see what I can do
with it....
Some of your files contain version ID stuff like here:
>
> include/asm-m68k/arch-mc68360/mc68360_enet.h:
>
> ***********************************
> * $Id: m68360_enet.h,v 1.1.1.1 2001/05/18 17:10:11 hamilton Exp $
> ***********************************
>
> Please remove this.
ok
I see some "#if 0" blocks in your code; please remove these.
ok
I see:
>
> #define CONFIG_BOOTFILE vmlinuz
>
> This looks broken to me. U-Boot does not boot a vmlinuz file, but
> U-Boot images created by mkimage.
Yes, this name is incorrect... Let it be uImage.
#define CFG_BAUDRATE_TABLE { 19200 }
>
> This is *very* restrictive. I recommend to support all commonly used
> baudrates instead (i. e. at least the range from 9600 through
> 115200).
ok
#define CFG_HZ (unsigned long int)32768000
>
> This is broken. CFG_HZ is required to be 1000 (i. e. millisecond
> ticks).
okkk..
#define CFG_SDRAM_SIZE 0x00800000
>
> Please don't do that. U-Boot style is to allow auto-adjustment to the
> actual RAM size.
>
>
> #define CFG_MALLOC_LEN (5*1024*1024)
>
> You have 8 MB of RAM and reserve 5 MB for malloc()? This seems broken
> to me.
Why not? I really have it working :)
You comment out relevant parts of lib_m68k/board.c - you must not do
> that!
Could you tell me the reason why I should not do it?
lib_m68k/time.c - your "implementation" of udelay() is broken. Please
> replace by a working version.
I'll try.
Please clean up these issues and resubmit.
>
>
I'm grateful to you for your help and for what you are doing :)
I will take into consideration your advice and recommendations. And I'll try
to correct my patch.
Best regards,
Matvejchikov Ilya.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20070411/2ac7b8c7/attachment.htm
More information about the U-Boot
mailing list