[U-Boot] v4 patch:SMDK6400: Fix some build bug

[U-Boot] v4 patch:SMDK6400: Fix some build bug

[seedshope]

Change from V1:
patch 1: 
patch 2: Delete some compile information from commit.
patch 3: Add LED modify information and Delete some compile information from commit.
patch 4: Add new patch for SDRAM init.

Change from v2:
patch2: Modify Makefile for arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/s3c64xx/cpu_init.s in build error.
It will generat redefine information for "mem_ctrl_asm_init" before the Modify.
patch4: Modify the Sergei Shtylyov comments and change the SDRAM size variable
for PHYS_SDRAM_SIZE_1.

Change from v3:
Add new patch 3: I discuss with Amicalement, I find the mutiple-link issue:
The first, the cpu_init.o have already been link for cmd_link_o_target
atfer compile. But, The link script re-link the point file. So the link
machine will generate multiple definition error information.
    
The second, Since the first 4kB of nand boot featue code move to nand_spl,
So It is not necessary to force the cpu_init.o in non-nand boot.

Delete the cpu_init.o from u-boot-nand.lds is safe.

patch 4: patch 4 and patch 5 is split from v2 patch4.
patch 6: Modify according Minkyu Kang comment

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 1/6] SMDK6400: Fix CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR undefined

[seedshope]

Fix CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR undefined issue.

Signed-off-by: seedshope <bocui107@gmail.com>
---
 include/configs/smdk6400.h |    5 +++++
 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/configs/smdk6400.h b/include/configs/smdk6400.h
index 671f2c7..c9acf58 100644
--- a/include/configs/smdk6400.h
+++ b/include/configs/smdk6400.h
@@ -44,6 +44,11 @@
 #define CONFIG_PERIPORT_BASE	0x70000000
 #define CONFIG_PERIPORT_SIZE	0x13
 
+#define CONFIG_SYS_IRAM_BASE    0x0c000000  /* Internal SRAM base address */
+#define CONFIG_SYS_IRAM_SIZE    0x2000      /* 8 KB of internal SRAM memory */
+#define CONFIG_SYS_IRAM_END     (CONFIG_SYS_IRAM_BASE + CONFIG_SYS_IRAM_SIZE)
+#define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR (CONFIG_SYS_IRAM_END - GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE)
+
 #define CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE	0x50000000
 
 /* input clock of PLL: SMDK6400 has 12MHz input clock */
-- 
1.7.1

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 2/6] SMDK6400: Fix some label undefined in build error

[seedshope]

Modify Makefile for cpu_init.c and Start.s use some label,this defined
u-boot.lds of arch/arm/cpu/arm1176. But SMDK6400 use the link script
board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot-nand.lds. So add some label form u-boot.lds
to u-boot-nand.lds

Signed-off-by: seedshope <bocui107@gmail.com>
---
 board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot-nand.lds |   27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot-nand.lds b/board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot-nand.lds
index 29a4f61..6771981 100644
--- a/board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot-nand.lds
+++ b/board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot-nand.lds
@@ -56,7 +56,28 @@ SECTIONS
 	.mmudata : { *(.mmudata) }
 
 	. = ALIGN(4);
-	__bss_start = .;
-	.bss : { *(.bss) . = ALIGN(4); }
-	_end = .;
+
+	.rel.dyn : {
+		__rel_dyn_start = .;
+		*(.rel*)
+		__rel_dyn_end = .;
+	}
+
+	.dynsym : {
+		__dynsym_start = .;
+		*(.dynsym)
+	}
+
+	.bss __rel_dyn_start (OVERLAY) : {
+		__bss_start = .;
+		*(.bss)
+		. = ALIGN(4);
+		_end = .;
+	}
+
+	/DISCARD/ : { *(.dynstr*) }
+	/DISCARD/ : { *(.dynamic*) }
+	/DISCARD/ : { *(.plt*) }
+	/DISCARD/ : { *(.interp*) }
+	/DISCARD/ : { *(.gnu*) }
 }
-- 
1.7.1

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 3/6] SMDK6400: Fix the mutiple link error

[seedshope]

The first, the cpu_init.o have already been link for cmd_link_o_target
atfer compile, But, The link script re-link the point file. So the link
machine will generate multiple definition error information.

The second, Since the first 4kB of nand boot featue code move to nand_spl,
So It is not necessary to force the cpu_init.o in non-nand boot.

Signed-off-by: seedshope <bocui107@gmail.com>
---
 board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot-nand.lds |    1 -
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot-nand.lds b/board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot-nand.lds
index 6771981..6bf4971 100644
--- a/board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot-nand.lds
+++ b/board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot-nand.lds
@@ -35,7 +35,6 @@ SECTIONS
 	.text      :
 	{
 	  arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/start.o	(.text)
-	  arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/s3c64xx/cpu_init.o	(.text)
 	  *(.text)
 	}
 
-- 
1.7.1

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 4/6] SMDK6400: Add some labels to u-boot.lds to support nand_spl

[seedshope]

In the nand_spl feature of SMDK6400. Add some relocation symbols to
nand_spl/board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot.lds to fix the compile error.

Signed-off-by: seedshope <bocui107@gmail.com>
---
 nand_spl/board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot.lds |   17 ++++++++++++++++-
 1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/nand_spl/board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot.lds b/nand_spl/board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot.lds
index 3ac6aa1..30b1573 100644
--- a/nand_spl/board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot.lds
+++ b/nand_spl/board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot.lds
@@ -55,7 +55,22 @@ SECTIONS
 	__u_boot_cmd_end = .;
 
 	. = ALIGN(4);
+
+	.rel.dyn : {
+	__rel_dyn_start = .;
+	*(.rel*)
+	__rel_dyn_end = .;
+	}
+
+	.dynsym : {
+	__dynsym_start = .;
+	*(.dynsym)
+	}
+
+	.bss __rel_dyn_start (OVERLAY) : {
 	__bss_start = .;
-	.bss : { *(.bss) . = ALIGN(4); }
+	*(.bss)
+	. = ALIGN(4);
 	_end = .;
+	}
 }
-- 
1.7.1

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 5/6] SMDK6400: Disable LED function in start.s on the nand booting

[seedshope]

Since nand boot have some limit for the first 4KB, We only
disable the LED function to reduce the code space. At the
same time, Fix the compile error for LED function undefined
in the compile time of nand_spl.

Signed-off-by: seedshope <bocui107@gmail.com>
---
 arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/start.S |    2 ++
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/start.S b/arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/start.S
index 237dcfe..ae3706a 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/start.S
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/start.S
@@ -354,9 +354,11 @@ clbss_l:str	r2, [r0]		/* clear loop...		    */
 	cmp	r0, r1
 	bne	clbss_l
 
+#ifndef CONFIG_NAND_SPL
 	bl coloured_LED_init
 	bl red_LED_on
 #endif
+#endif
 
 /*
  * We are done. Do not return, instead branch to second part of board
-- 
1.7.1

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 6/6] SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

[seedshope]

Since SDRAM init function have already change, So the SDRAM
initial function must be change.

Signed-off-by: seedshope <bocui107@gmail.com>
---
 board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c |   10 +++++++++-
 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c b/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
index 35aa40b..1d03b7a 100644
--- a/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
+++ b/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
@@ -78,10 +78,18 @@ int board_init(void)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-int dram_init(void)
+void dram_init_banksize(void)
 {
+	DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
+
 	gd->bd->bi_dram[0].start = PHYS_SDRAM_1;
 	gd->bd->bi_dram[0].size = PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE;
+}
+
+int dram_init(void)
+{
+	gd->ram_size = get_ram_size((long *)CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE,
+			PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE);
 
 	return 0;
 }
-- 
1.7.1

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 6/6] SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

[Sergei Shtylyov]

Hello.

seedshope wrote:

> Since SDRAM init function have already change, So the SDRAM
> initial function must be change.

    This description sounds somewhat tautological...

> Signed-off-by: seedshope <bocui107@gmail.com>

    Your real name is required in the signoff.

> ---
>  board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c |   10 +++++++++-
>  1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

> diff --git a/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c b/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
> index 35aa40b..1d03b7a 100644
> --- a/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
> +++ b/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
> @@ -78,10 +78,18 @@ int board_init(void)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> -int dram_init(void)
> +void dram_init_banksize(void)
>  {
> +	DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
> +
>  	gd->bd->bi_dram[0].start = PHYS_SDRAM_1;
>  	gd->bd->bi_dram[0].size = PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE;
> +}
> +
> +int dram_init(void)
> +{
> +	gd->ram_size = get_ram_size((long *)CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE,
> +			PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE);

   Could you move this last line more to the right?

WBR, Sergei

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 6/6] SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

[seedshope]

On 01/22/2011 01:52 AM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello.
>
> seedshope wrote:
>
>> Since SDRAM init function have already change, So the SDRAM
>> initial function must be change.
>
>    This description sounds somewhat tautological...
If I describe  as following:
Since SDRAM init function have already change, Modify SDRAM inital
function to adapt to it.

How about it?
>
>> Signed-off-by: seedshope <bocui107@gmail.com>
>
>    Your real name is required in the signoff.
I use the name for my pen name. It is not problem.
>
>> ---
>>  board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c |   10 +++++++++-
>>  1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
>> diff --git a/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c 
>> b/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
>> index 35aa40b..1d03b7a 100644
>> --- a/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
>> +++ b/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
>> @@ -78,10 +78,18 @@ int board_init(void)
>>      return 0;
>>  }
>>
>> -int dram_init(void)
>> +void dram_init_banksize(void)
>>  {
>> +    DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
>> +
>>      gd->bd->bi_dram[0].start = PHYS_SDRAM_1;
>>      gd->bd->bi_dram[0].size = PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE;
>> +}
>> +
>> +int dram_init(void)
>> +{
>> +    gd->ram_size = get_ram_size((long *)CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE,
>> +            PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE);
>
>   Could you move this last line more to the right?
Ya, the orig is ok, But I re-do the patch, It is miss. sorry.

Thanks
seedshope
>
> WBR, Sergei

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 6/6] SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

[seedshope]

On 01/22/2011 02:05 AM, seedshope wrote:
> On 01/22/2011 01:52 AM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
>> Hello.
>>
>> seedshope wrote:
>>
>>> Since SDRAM init function have already change, So the SDRAM
>>> initial function must be change.
>>
>>    This description sounds somewhat tautological...
> If I describe  as following:
> Since SDRAM init function have already change, Modify SDRAM inital
> function to adapt to it.
>
> How about it?
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: seedshope <bocui107@gmail.com>
>>
>>    Your real name is required in the signoff.
> I use the name for my pen name. It is not problem.
>>
>>> ---
>>>  board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c |   10 +++++++++-
>>>  1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>>> diff --git a/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c 
>>> b/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
>>> index 35aa40b..1d03b7a 100644
>>> --- a/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
>>> +++ b/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
>>> @@ -78,10 +78,18 @@ int board_init(void)
>>>      return 0;
>>>  }
>>>
>>> -int dram_init(void)
>>> +void dram_init_banksize(void)
>>>  {
>>> +    DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
>>> +
>>>      gd->bd->bi_dram[0].start = PHYS_SDRAM_1;
>>>      gd->bd->bi_dram[0].size = PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +int dram_init(void)
>>> +{
>>> +    gd->ram_size = get_ram_size((long *)CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE,
>>> +            PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE);
>>
>>   Could you move this last line more to the right?
> Ya, the orig is ok, But I re-do the patch, It is miss. sorry.
Hi Sergei,

I feel this may be you e-mail issue. I open my patch, It is display as 
following:
+         gd->ram_size = get_ram_size((long *)CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE,
+                                    PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE);

Thanks,
seedshope
>
> Thanks
> seedshope
>>
>> WBR, Sergei
>

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 6/6] SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

[Albert ARIBAUD]

Le 21/01/2011 19:15, seedshope a ?crit :
> On 01/22/2011 02:05 AM, seedshope wrote:
>> On 01/22/2011 01:52 AM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
>>> Hello.
>>>
>>> seedshope wrote:
>>>
>>>> Since SDRAM init function have already change, So the SDRAM
>>>> initial function must be change.
>>>
>>>     This description sounds somewhat tautological...
>> If I describe  as following:
>> Since SDRAM init function have already change, Modify SDRAM inital
>> function to adapt to it.
>>
>> How about it?

Still unclear, due to the fact you're using the same three terms 
("init/initial, RAM, function") for two apparently different things.

>>>> Signed-off-by: seedshope<bocui107@gmail.com>
>>>
>>>     Your real name is required in the signoff.
>> I use the name for my pen name. It is not problem.

I think Sergei means pen names should not be used. I won't personally 
pass judgment, but so far I've always seen contributors using their 
actual names.

> I feel this may be you e-mail issue. I open my patch, It is display as
> following:
>
> +         gd->ram_size = get_ram_size((long *)CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE,
> +                                    PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE);

Your patch, pulled from patchwork and viewed in vi, has three tabs on 
that second line, which does not align properly. You should check your 
code editor settings re: tabs.

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 6/6] SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

[seedshope]

On 01/22/2011 02:29 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Le 21/01/2011 19:15, seedshope a ?crit :
>> On 01/22/2011 02:05 AM, seedshope wrote:
>>> On 01/22/2011 01:52 AM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
>>>> Hello.
>>>>
>>>> seedshope wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Since SDRAM init function have already change, So the SDRAM
>>>>> initial function must be change.
>>>>      This description sounds somewhat tautological...
>>> If I describe  as following:
>>> Since SDRAM init function have already change, Modify SDRAM inital
>>> function to adapt to it.
>>>
>>> How about it?
> Still unclear, due to the fact you're using the same three terms
> ("init/initial, RAM, function") for two apparently different things.
Ya, Maybe, But I don't know to describe it.

The patch is only to modify the dram_init() and dram_init_banksize(),
Could you help me to describe?

Thank you very much?
seedshope
>>>>> Signed-off-by: seedshope<bocui107@gmail.com>
>>>>      Your real name is required in the signoff.
>>> I use the name for my pen name. It is not problem.
> I think Sergei means pen names should not be used. I won't personally
> pass judgment, but so far I've always seen contributors using their
> actual names.
>
ok
>> I feel this may be you e-mail issue. I open my patch, It is display as
>> following:
>>
>> +         gd->ram_size = get_ram_size((long *)CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE,
>> +                                    PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE);
> Your patch, pulled from patchwork and viewed in vi, has three tabs on
> that second line, which does not align properly. You should check your
> code editor settings re: tabs.
My patch is ok, I just two tabs in my e-mail, But I sent the mail,
It is change.

Thanks
hongbo
> Amicalement,

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 6/6] SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

[Albert ARIBAUD]

Le 21/01/2011 19:43, seedshope a ?crit :

> On 01/22/2011 02:29 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
>> Le 21/01/2011 19:15, seedshope a ?crit :
>>> On 01/22/2011 02:05 AM, seedshope wrote:
>>>> On 01/22/2011 01:52 AM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
>>>>> Hello.
>>>>>
>>>>> seedshope wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Since SDRAM init function have already change, So the SDRAM
>>>>>> initial function must be change.
>>>>>       This description sounds somewhat tautological...
>>>> If I describe  as following:
>>>> Since SDRAM init function have already change, Modify SDRAM inital
>>>> function to adapt to it.
>>>>
>>>> How about it?
>> Still unclear, due to the fact you're using the same three terms
>> ("init/initial, RAM, function") for two apparently different things.
> Ya, Maybe, But I don't know to describe it.
>
> The patch is only to modify the dram_init() and dram_init_banksize(),
> Could you help me to describe?
>
> Thank you very much?
> seedshope

The reason for the change to dram_init is not actually about DRAM. If 
you look up similar patches, you'll find out it is about not being able 
to access gd->bd because bd does not exist, and this is so since the ELF 
relocation was introduced. So some good descriptions could be "do not 
use gd->bd any more" or "fix dram_init for relocation support", for 
instance.

>>>>>> Signed-off-by: seedshope<bocui107@gmail.com>
>>>>>       Your real name is required in the signoff.
>>>> I use the name for my pen name. It is not problem.
>> I think Sergei means pen names should not be used. I won't personally
>> pass judgment, but so far I've always seen contributors using their
>> actual names.
>>
> ok
>>> I feel this may be you e-mail issue. I open my patch, It is display as
>>> following:
>>>
>>> +         gd->ram_size = get_ram_size((long *)CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE,
>>> +                                    PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE);
>> Your patch, pulled from patchwork and viewed in vi, has three tabs on
>> that second line, which does not align properly. You should check your
>> code editor settings re: tabs.
> My patch is ok, I just two tabs in my e-mail, But I sent the mail,
> It is change.

Do you send the patch through git format-patch and git send-email? Many 
e-mail softwares have weird issues when posting git patches, which is 
why git has its own tools for sending patches via e-mail.

> Thanks
> hongbo

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 1/6] SMDK6400: Fix CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR undefined

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear seedshope,

In message <1295624053-8060-2-git-send-email-bocui107@gmail.com> you wrote:
> Fix CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR undefined issue.
> 
> Signed-off-by: seedshope <bocui107@gmail.com>

I'm sorry, but please consider all your patches rejected unless you
provide a Signed-off-by: using your real name (sorry, no pseudonyms
or anonymous contributions.)


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
Pray to God, but keep rowing to shore. - Russian Proverb

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 1/6] SMDK6400: Fix CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR undefined

[seedshope]

On 01/22/2011 04:42 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear seedshope,
>
> In message<1295624053-8060-2-git-send-email-bocui107@gmail.com>  you wrote:
>> Fix CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR undefined issue.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: seedshope<bocui107@gmail.com>
> I'm sorry, but please consider all your patches rejected unless you
> provide a Signed-off-by: using your real name (sorry, no pseudonyms
> or anonymous contributions.)
>
ok, This is the first to join the free software for me.
So I use my pseudonyms(My English name), I will use the spelling of my name.

Thanks,
seedshope
> Best regards,
>
> Wolfgang Denk
>

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 6/6] SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

[seedshope]

On 01/22/2011 03:11 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Le 21/01/2011 19:43, seedshope a ?crit :
>
>> On 01/22/2011 02:29 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
>>> Le 21/01/2011 19:15, seedshope a ?crit :
>>>> On 01/22/2011 02:05 AM, seedshope wrote:
>>>>> On 01/22/2011 01:52 AM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
>>>>>> Hello.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> seedshope wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since SDRAM init function have already change, So the SDRAM
>>>>>>> initial function must be change.
>>>>>>        This description sounds somewhat tautological...
>>>>> If I describe  as following:
>>>>> Since SDRAM init function have already change, Modify SDRAM inital
>>>>> function to adapt to it.
>>>>>
>>>>> How about it?
>>> Still unclear, due to the fact you're using the same three terms
>>> ("init/initial, RAM, function") for two apparently different things.
>> Ya, Maybe, But I don't know to describe it.
>>
>> The patch is only to modify the dram_init() and dram_init_banksize(),
>> Could you help me to describe?
>>
>> Thank you very much?
>> seedshope
> The reason for the change to dram_init is not actually about DRAM. If
> you look up similar patches, you'll find out it is about not being able
> to access gd->bd because bd does not exist, and this is so since the ELF
> relocation was introduced. So some good descriptions could be "do not
> use gd->bd any more" or "fix dram_init for relocation support", for
> instance.
>
ok,
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: seedshope<bocui107@gmail.com>
>>>>>>        Your real name is required in the signoff.
>>>>> I use the name for my pen name. It is not problem.
>>> I think Sergei means pen names should not be used. I won't personally
>>> pass judgment, but so far I've always seen contributors using their
>>> actual names.
>>>
>> ok
>>>> I feel this may be you e-mail issue. I open my patch, It is display as
>>>> following:
>>>>
>>>> +         gd->ram_size = get_ram_size((long *)CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE,
>>>> +                                    PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE);
>>> Your patch, pulled from patchwork and viewed in vi, has three tabs on
>>> that second line, which does not align properly. You should check your
>>> code editor settings re: tabs.
>> My patch is ok, I just two tabs in my e-mail, But I sent the mail,
>> It is change.
> Do you send the patch through git format-patch and git send-email?
Yes, I use the git format-patch and git send-email
> Many
> e-mail softwares have weird issues when posting git patches, which is
> why git has its own tools for sending patches via e-mail.
ok

Thanks
seedshope

>> Thanks
>> hongbo
> Amicalement,

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 6/6] SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

[Albert ARIBAUD]

Hi seedshope,

Le 22/01/2011 02:56, seedshope a ?crit :

>>> My patch is ok, I just two tabs in my e-mail, But I sent the mail,
>>> It is change.
>> Do you send the patch through git format-patch and git send-email?

> Yes, I use the git format-patch and git send-email

>> Many e-mail softwares have weird issues when posting git patches,
>> which is why git has its own tools for sending patches via e-mail.

> ok

Since you're using git format-patch and git send-email, then your 
original change is not correctly aligned. I suggest you check your code 
editor's settings on indentation and use of tabulations, notably the 
"tab size": tabs should align on 8-space multiples; also check that your 
editor uses a fixed font -- you never know.

>>> Thanks
>>> hongbo

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 6/6] SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

[Minkyu Kang]

Dear seedshope,

On 22 January 2011 00:34, seedshope <bocui107@gmail.com> wrote:
> Since SDRAM init function have already change, So the SDRAM
> initial function must be change.
>
> Signed-off-by: seedshope <bocui107@gmail.com>
> ---
> ?board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c | ? 10 +++++++++-
> ?1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c b/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
> index 35aa40b..1d03b7a 100644
> --- a/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
> +++ b/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
> @@ -78,10 +78,18 @@ int board_init(void)
> ? ? ? ?return 0;
> ?}
>
> -int dram_init(void)
> +void dram_init_banksize(void)
> ?{
> + ? ? ? DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;

Please remove it.

> +
> ? ? ? ?gd->bd->bi_dram[0].start = PHYS_SDRAM_1;
> ? ? ? ?gd->bd->bi_dram[0].size = PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE;

Thanks
Minkyu Kang
-- 
from. prom.
www.promsoft.net

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 6/6] SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

[Thomas Langer]

Hi seedshope,

seedshope <bocui107 <at> gmail.com> writes:

> -int dram_init(void)
> +void dram_init_banksize(void)
>  {
> +	DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;

This declaration should be done on file scope, not in a function.

> +
>  	gd->bd->bi_dram[0].start = PHYS_SDRAM_1;
>  	gd->bd->bi_dram[0].size = PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE;
> +}
> +

Best regards,
Thomas

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 6/6] SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

[seedshope]

On 01/22/2011 03:31 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi seedshope,
>
> Le 22/01/2011 02:56, seedshope a ?crit :
>
>>>> My patch is ok, I just two tabs in my e-mail, But I sent the mail,
>>>> It is change.
>>> Do you send the patch through git format-patch and git send-email?
>
>> Yes, I use the git format-patch and git send-email
>
>>> Many e-mail softwares have weird issues when posting git patches,
>>> which is why git has its own tools for sending patches via e-mail.
>
>> ok
>
> Since you're using git format-patch and git send-email, then your 
> original change is not correctly aligned. I suggest you check your 
> code editor's settings on indentation and use of tabulations, notably 
> the "tab size": tabs should align on 8-space multiples; also check 
> that your editor uses a fixed font -- you never know.
Hi Amicalement

I check my patch 6 on the 
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot, It look fine.
I have a bit despondent. Why do you think it has a format problem.

Thanks
seedshope
>
> Amicalement,

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 6/6] SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

[seedshope]

On 01/22/2011 01:52 AM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello.
>
> seedshope wrote:
>
>> Since SDRAM init function have already change, So the SDRAM
>> initial function must be change.
>
> This description sounds somewhat tautological...
>
>> Signed-off-by: seedshope <bocui107@gmail.com>
>
> Your real name is required in the signoff.
>
>> ---
>> board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c | 10 +++++++++-
>> 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
>> diff --git a/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c 
>> b/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
>> index 35aa40b..1d03b7a 100644
>> --- a/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
>> +++ b/board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c
>> @@ -78,10 +78,18 @@ int board_init(void)
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> -int dram_init(void)
>> +void dram_init_banksize(void)
>> {
>> + DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
>> +
>> gd->bd->bi_dram[0].start = PHYS_SDRAM_1;
>> gd->bd->bi_dram[0].size = PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE;
>> +}
>> +
>> +int dram_init(void)
>> +{
>> + gd->ram_size = get_ram_size((long *)CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE,
>> + PHYS_SDRAM_1_SIZE);
You can look at the web 
site(http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot) for the patch,
It is inconsistent with your description.

Thanks
seedshope
>
> Could you move this last line more to the right?
>
> WBR, Sergei

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 6/6] SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

[Albert ARIBAUD]

Hi seedshope,

Le 22/01/2011 20:23, seedshope a ?crit :

> Hi Amicalement

That's Albert, actually. :)

> I check my patch 6 on the
> http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot, It look fine.
> I have a bit despondent. Why do you think it has a format problem.

V5 of your patch has one more tab on as V4 had on the line we're 
discussion. It is a bit better ; Sergei will tell if that's enough for him.

> Thanks
> seedshope

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 6/6] SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

[seedshope]

On 01/23/2011 04:28 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi seedshope,
>
> Le 22/01/2011 20:23, seedshope a ?crit :
>
>> Hi Amicalement
>
> That's Albert, actually. :)
>
>> I check my patch 6 on the
>> http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot, It look fine.
>> I have a bit despondent. Why do you think it has a format problem.
>
> V5 of your patch has one more tab on as V4 had on the line we're 
> discussion. It is a bit better ; Sergei will tell if that's enough for 
> him.
yes,  I just found the error in web site. I miss something in my 
thunderbird. such as tab convert space, So the format is change.
Here, I beg you to forgot my miss.

BR
seedshope
>> Thanks
>> seedshope
>
> Amicalement,

[U-Boot] [v4 patch 6/6] SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear seedshope,

In message <4D3B40AC.8090105@gmail.com> you wrote:
>
> yes,  I just found the error in web site. I miss something in my
> thunderbird. such as tab convert space, So the format is change.
> Here, I beg you to forgot my miss.

It is usually helpful to search for and read the available documentation.

See file Documentation/email-clients.txt in your Linux source tree, or:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=blob;f=Documentation/email-clients.txt

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
In a business, marketroids, salespukes, and  lawyers  have  different
goals from those who actually do work and produce something. Usually,
is  is the former who triumph over the latter, due to the simple rule
that those who print the money make the rules.
         -- Tom Christiansen in <5jdcls$b04$2@csnews.cs.colorado.edu>