[U-Boot] [STATUS] Are we ready for v2012.04.1 ??

[U-Boot] [STATUS] Are we ready for v2012.04.1 ??

[Wolfgang Denk]

Hi,

are there any other urgent fixes that should make it into the imminent
v2012.04.1 maintenance release ?

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
God made the integers; all else is the work of Man.       - Kronecker

[U-Boot] [STATUS] Are we ready for v2012.04.1 ??

[Dirk Behme]

On 24.04.2012 08:35, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> are there any other urgent fixes that should make it into the imminent
> v2012.04.1 maintenance release ?

I tested the recent master which includes the three patches planned for 
v2012.04.1 booting a device tree based kernel and it works :)

So from my side: No, nothing else needed.

Many thanks and best regards

Dirk

[U-Boot] [STATUS] Are we ready for v2012.04.1 ??

[Thierry Reding]

* Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> are there any other urgent fixes that should make it into the imminent
> v2012.04.1 maintenance release ?

I just sent two more patches that are required to boot the Plutux and Medcom
boards successfully. Sorry for being so late, but I only got around to test
the latest release on both boards now. Both patches are very low-risk and it
would be nice to have them in an official release but I understand if you'd
rather not include them this late.

Thierry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20120424/bb4f4f56/attachment.pgp>

[U-Boot] [STATUS] Are we ready for v2012.04.1 ??

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Thierry Reding,

In message <20120424075911.GA29939@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de> you wrote:
> 
> I just sent two more patches that are required to boot the Plutux and Medcom
> boards successfully. Sorry for being so late, but I only got around to test
> the latest release on both boards now. Both patches are very low-risk and it
> would be nice to have them in an official release but I understand if you'd
> rather not include them this late.

Sorry, but both patches touch common code; this would require more
intensive testing.

I will not include these into v2012.04.1, which is intended to fix
only really critical bugs.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
My brother sent me a postcard the other day with this  big  sattelite
photo  of the entire earth on it. On the back it said: "Wish you were
here".                                                - Steven Wright

[U-Boot] [STATUS] Are we ready for v2012.04.1 ??

[Fabio Estevam]

Dirk,

On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 4:58 AM, Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@de.bosch.com> wrote:
> I tested the recent master which includes the three patches planned for
> v2012.04.1 booting a device tree based kernel and it works :)

Have you tested it on a mx6qsabrelite using the latest mainline kernel?

My kernel did not boot.

This was what I did:

make imx_v6_v7_defconfig
make
make imx6q-sabrelite.dtb

cat arch/arm/boot/zImage arch/arm/boot/imx6q-sabrelite.dtb >
arch/arm/boot/zImage_dtb

mkimage -A arm -O linux -T kernel -C none -a 0x10008000 -e 0x10008000
-n Linux -d arch/arm/boot/zImage_dtb arch/arm/boot/uImage_dtb

cp arch/arm/boot/uImage_dtb /tftpboot/uImage

It used to work before. Is this still valid?

Thanks,

Fabio Estevam

[U-Boot] [STATUS] Are we ready for v2012.04.1 ??

[Dirk Behme]

On 24.04.2012 18:21, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Dirk,
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 4:58 AM, Dirk Behme<dirk.behme@de.bosch.com>  wrote:
>> I tested the recent master which includes the three patches planned for
>> v2012.04.1 booting a device tree based kernel and it works :)
>
> Have you tested it on a mx6qsabrelite using the latest mainline kernel?

Yes.

Just to make sure: You use the recent mainline with the 4 additional 
patches on top of v2012.04:

http://git.denx.de/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=u-boot.git;a=summary

> My kernel did not boot.
>
> This was what I did:
>
> make imx_v6_v7_defconfig
> make
> make imx6q-sabrelite.dtb
>
> cat arch/arm/boot/zImage arch/arm/boot/imx6q-sabrelite.dtb>
> arch/arm/boot/zImage_dtb
>
> mkimage -A arm -O linux -T kernel -C none -a 0x10008000 -e 0x10008000
> -n Linux -d arch/arm/boot/zImage_dtb arch/arm/boot/uImage_dtb
>
> cp arch/arm/boot/uImage_dtb /tftpboot/uImage
>
> It used to work before. Is this still valid?

I don't know ;) Or better: I don't use the device tree append method.

I don't have the details here, but what I do (out of my head, so there 
might be some details wrong):

Use the mainline kernel 3.4-rc4
make imx_v6_v7_defconfig
make LOADADDR=0x10800000 uImage

dd if=u-boot.imx of=/dev/sdd bs=512 skip=2 && sync
dd if=imx6q-sabrelite.dtb of=/dev/sdd bs=512 skip=1024 && sync (<- put 
the dtb to 512kB on the SD card)
dd if=uImage of=/dev/sdd bs=512 skip=2048 && sync (put the uImage to 1MB)

and then in U-Boot:

mmc read 0x12000000 0x800 0x2000 (read the kernel to 0x12000000)
mmc read 0x11ff0000 0x400 0x40 (read the device tree to 0x11ff0000)
bootm 0x12000000 - 0x11ff0000

You could do the same using tftp as proposed by Shawn:

tftpboot 0x12000000 uImage; tftpboot 0x11ff0000 imx6q-sabrelite.dtb; bootm
0x12000000 - 0x11ff0000

Again, this is just out of my head, so sorry if something is wrong.

Best regards

Dirk

[U-Boot] [STATUS] Are we ready for v2012.04.1 ??

[Marek Vasut]

Dear Wolfgang Denk,

> Hi,
> 
> are there any other urgent fixes that should make it into the imminent
> v2012.04.1 maintenance release ?

Not from my side.

> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Wolfgang Denk

Best regards,
Marek Vasut

[U-Boot] [STATUS] Are we ready for v2012.04.1 ??

[Fabio Estevam]

On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@googlemail.com> wrote:

> I don't have the details here, but what I do (out of my head, so there might
> be some details wrong):

Thanks, using your method I am able to boot it again.

Regards,

Fabio Estevam