[U-Boot-Users] Question about CFG_ENV_ADDR during RAMBOOT

[Ulf Samuelsson]

> In message <002601c79d29$4da6de70$3125b10a at atmel.com> you wrote:
>>
>> Things are broken, because Wolfgang refuses patches fixing problems on
>> AT91 on principle.
> 
> Nonsense.

Let me rephrase this in a less sloppy manner.

Things are broken, because Wolfgang refuses [some critical] patches fixing problems on
AT91 on principle. - Dataflash should not be treated as random access memory.
 
> Fix the known issues with your patches, submit these and get them
> accepted by the ARM custodian. If they don't break general U-Boot
> design criteria I will then just pull from the ARM repo.
> 
> But please fix the issues.

I am not going to develop new user interface for the dataflash
because I do not agree that it is neccessary to change the user interface
and will leave the work to those that believe it is neccessary.

Until they do, it is not really meaningful to submit any of the other patches
because without working dataflash/run from SDRAM support, no recent AT91
board will work.

Still, I have submitted a patch and will not submit anything more
until I know if it is rejected or accepted.
I know from Peter that it is in the queue and understand that
since this is a new process for him, I will not put too much pressure.

> 
>> Removing support will cause more work for people
>> because the existing patches to make things work
>> will have to be modified...
>> 
>> What is the point of sabotaging others peoples efforts???
> 
> Instead of overwehemlimng everybody with a series of monster patches
> that change change U-Boot inside out you could try submitting small,
> isolated patches that fix the real problems step by step. If your
> patches are orthogonal, you could get at lest 90% of your stuff merged
> without any discussion, and then we could focus oin the remaining
> difficult parts.

I did submit a patch which basically split a file,
into two parts and moved them to different locations.
This rendered about 50 emails and requests for total rewrites...

> 
> Just because others don't agree with you does not mean  the  sabotage
> you. Robert Schwebel and others tried to explain this to you before.
> 

Disagreement with me is not sabotage, but I consider removing "board/at91rm9200dk"
just because it does not work, sabotage.
It forces additional work on me, and I fail to see any advantage.

> If you cannot advance with brute force, try using diplomacy  instead.
> Just insulting others is definitely not helpful.

At the moment I do not see how I can get patches accepted.
Hope to be surprised...

> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Wolfgang Denk
> 
> -- 


Best Regards
Ulf Samuelsson                ulf at atmel.com
Atmel Nordic AB
Mail:  Box 2033, 174 02 Sundbyberg, Sweden
Visit:  Kavallerivägen 24, 174 58 Sundbyberg, Sweden
Phone +46 (8) 441 54 22     Fax +46 (8) 441 54 29
GSM    +46 (706) 22 44 57

Technical support when I am not available:
AT90 AVR Applications Group: mailto:avr at atmel.com
AT91 ARM Applications Group: mailto:at91support at atmel.com
AVR32 Applications Group        mailto:avr32 at atmel.com
http://www.avrfreaks.net/;            http://avr32linux.org/
http://www.at91.com/ ;                ftp://at91dist:distrib@81.80.104.162/