v4 patch:SMDK6400: Fix some build bug

U-Boot Superseded seedshope 6 participants 24 messages Jan 21, 2011 – Jan 22, 2011 Arm (32-bit)

Share & tools

seedshope

author

2011-01-21 15:34 UTC #0 lore raw

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

seedshope

author

2011-01-21 15:34 UTC #1 lore raw

PATCH v4 1/6 SMDK6400: Fix CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR undefined

Fix CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR undefined issue.

Signed-off-by seedshope <[email protected]>

---
 include/configs/smdk6400.h |    5 +++++
 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

include/configs/smdk6400.h +5 -0

index 671f2c7..c9acf58 100644
@@ -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 */

Signature · 1 line

1.7.1

Wolfgang Denk

2011-01-21 20:42 UTC #2 lore raw

PATCH v4 1/6 SMDK6400: Fix CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR undefined

Dear seedshope,

Quoted 3 lines · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:

Fix CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR undefined issue.
Signed-off-by seedshope <[email protected]>

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

Signature · 4 lines

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

seedshope

author

2011-01-22 01:51 UTC #3 lore raw

PATCH v4 1/6 SMDK6400: Fix CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR undefined

Quoted 10 lines · Wolfgang Denk

Dear seedshope,
Quoted 3 lines · In message<[email protected]> you wrote:
Fix CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR undefined issue.
Signed-off-by seedshope<[email protected]>
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

Quoted 4 lines

Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk

seedshope

author

2011-01-21 15:34 UTC #4 lore raw

PATCH v4 2/6 SMDK6400: Fix some label undefined in build error

In reply to 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 <[email protected]>

---
 board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot-nand.lds |   27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot-nand.lds +24 -3

index 29a4f61..6771981 100644
@@ -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*) }
 }

Signature · 1 line

1.7.1

seedshope

author

2011-01-21 15:34 UTC #5 lore raw

PATCH v4 3/6 SMDK6400: Fix the mutiple link error

In reply to 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 <[email protected]>

---
 board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot-nand.lds |    1 -
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot-nand.lds +0 -1

index 6771981..6bf4971 100644
@@ -35,7 +35,6 @@ SECTIONS
 	.text      :
 	{
 	  arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/start.o	(.text)
-	  arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/s3c64xx/cpu_init.o	(.text)
 	  *(.text)
 	}

Signature · 1 line

1.7.1

seedshope

author

2011-01-21 15:34 UTC #6 lore raw

PATCH v4 4/6 SMDK6400: Add some labels to u-boot.lds to support nand_spl

In reply to 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 <[email protected]>

---
 nand_spl/board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot.lds |   17 ++++++++++++++++-
 1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

nand_spl/board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot.lds +16 -1

index 3ac6aa1..30b1573 100644
@@ -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 = .;
+	}
 }

Signature · 1 line

1.7.1

seedshope

author

2011-01-21 15:34 UTC #7 lore raw

PATCH v4 5/6 SMDK6400: Disable LED function in start.s on the nand booting

In reply to 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 <[email protected]>

---
 arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/start.S |    2 ++
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/start.S +2 -0

index 237dcfe..ae3706a 100644
@@ -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

Signature · 1 line

1.7.1

seedshope

author

2011-01-21 15:34 UTC #8 lore raw

PATCH v4 6/6 SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

In reply to seedshope

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

Signed-off-by seedshope <[email protected]>

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

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +9 -1

index 35aa40b..1d03b7a 100644
@@ -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;
 }

Signature · 1 line

1.7.1

Sergei Shtylyov

2011-01-21 17:52 UTC #9 lore raw

PATCH v4 6/6 SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

Hello.

Quoted 2 lines · seedshope

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

This description sounds somewhat tautological...

Quoted 1 line

Signed-off-by seedshope <[email protected]>

Your real name is required in the signoff.

Quoted 15 lines

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

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +1 -1

index 35aa40b..1d03b7a 100644
@@ -78,10 +78,18 @@ int board_init(void)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-int dram_init(void)
+void dram_init_banksize(void)
 {

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c int board_init(void) · line 92

Quoted 10 lines

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +8 -0

+	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

seedshope

author

2011-01-21 18:05 UTC #10 lore raw

PATCH v4 6/6 SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

Quoted 8 lines · Sergei Shtylyov

Hello.
Quoted 2 lines · seedshope
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?

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 2 lines
Signed-off-by seedshope <[email protected]>
Your real name is required in the signoff.

I use the name for my pen name. It is not problem.

Quoted 14 lines

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

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +0 -0

index 35aa40b..1d03b7a 100644
@@ -78,10 +78,18 @@ int board_init(void)
     return 0;
 }

Quoted 15 lines

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c int board_init(void) · line 92

Quoted 13 lines

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +9 -1

-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

Quoted 2 lines

WBR, Sergei

seedshope

author

2011-01-21 18:15 UTC #11 lore raw

PATCH v4 6/6 SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

Quoted 48 lines · seedshope

Quoted 8 lines · Sergei Shtylyov
Hello.
Quoted 2 lines · seedshope
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?
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Signed-off-by seedshope <[email protected]>
Your real name is required in the signoff.
I use the name for my pen name. It is not problem.
Quoted 14 lines
Quoted 14 lines
---
 board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c |   10 +++++++++-
 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +0 -0
index 35aa40b..1d03b7a 100644
@@ -78,10 +78,18 @@ int board_init(void)
     return 0;
 }
 
Quoted 15 lines
board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c int board_init(void) · line 92
Quoted 13 lines
board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +9 -1
-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?

Quoted 1 line

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

Quoted 6 lines

Thanks
seedshope
Quoted 2 lines
WBR, Sergei

Albert ARIBAUD

2011-01-21 18:29 UTC #12 lore raw

PATCH v4 6/6 SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

Le 21/01/2011 19:15, seedshope a ?crit :

Quoted 9 lines · seedshope

Quoted 8 lines · Sergei Shtylyov
Quoted 7 lines
Hello.
Quoted 2 lines · seedshope
Since SDRAM init function have already change, So the SDRAM initial function must be change.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
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.

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
Signed-off-by seedshope<[email protected]>
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.

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c int board_init(void) · line 92

Quoted 5 lines

I feel this may be you e-mail issue. I open my patch, It is display as following:
board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +2 -0
+         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,

Signature · 1 line

Albert.

seedshope

author

2011-01-21 18:43 UTC #13 lore raw

PATCH v4 6/6 SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

Quoted 9 lines · Albert ARIBAUD

Le 21/01/2011 19:15, seedshope a ?crit :
Quoted 8 lines · seedshope
Quoted 7 lines · Sergei Shtylyov
Quoted 6 lines
Hello.
Quoted 2 lines · seedshope
Since SDRAM init function have already change, So the SDRAM initial function must be change.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
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

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 1 line
Signed-off-by seedshope<[email protected]>
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.

Quoted 8 lines

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c int board_init(void) · line 92
Quoted 5 lines
I feel this may be you e-mail issue. I open my patch, It is display as following:
board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +2 -0
+         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

Quoted 1 line

Amicalement,

Albert ARIBAUD

2011-01-21 19:11 UTC #14 lore raw

PATCH v4 6/6 SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

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

Quoted 18 lines · Albert ARIBAUD

Quoted 9 lines
Le 21/01/2011 19:15, seedshope a ?crit :
Quoted 8 lines · seedshope
Quoted 7 lines · Sergei Shtylyov
Quoted 6 lines
Hello.
Quoted 2 lines · seedshope
Since SDRAM init function have already change, So the SDRAM initial function must be change.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
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.

Quoted 7 lines

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.

Quoted 11 lines

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 1 line
Signed-off-by seedshope<[email protected]>
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
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 3 lines
I feel this may be you e-mail issue. I open my patch, It is display as following:

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines
board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c int board_init(void) · line 92
Quoted 2 lines
board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +2 -0
+         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.

Quoted 2 lines

Thanks
hongbo

Amicalement,

Signature · 1 line

Albert.

seedshope

author

2011-01-22 01:56 UTC #15 lore raw

PATCH v4 6/6 SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

Quoted 25 lines · Albert ARIBAUD

Le 21/01/2011 19:43, seedshope a ?crit :
Quoted 23 lines · Albert ARIBAUD
Quoted 9 lines
Le 21/01/2011 19:15, seedshope a ?crit :
Quoted 8 lines · seedshope
Quoted 7 lines · Sergei Shtylyov
Quoted 6 lines
Hello.
Quoted 2 lines · seedshope
Since SDRAM init function have already change, So the SDRAM initial function must be change.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
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?

Quoted 9 lines

Quoted 2 lines
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,

Quoted 11 lines

Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 1 line
Signed-off-by seedshope<[email protected]>
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
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 3 lines
I feel this may be you e-mail issue. I open my patch, It is display as following:

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Review
Quoted 2 lines
(quoted diff) +2 -0
+         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

Quoted 3 lines

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
seedshope

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 2 lines
Thanks
hongbo
Amicalement,

Albert ARIBAUD

2011-01-22 07:31 UTC #16 lore raw

PATCH v4 6/6 SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

Hi seedshope,

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

Quoted 10 lines

Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 2 lines
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
Quoted 2 lines
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.

Quoted 2 lines

Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Thanks
hongbo

Amicalement,

Signature · 1 line

Albert.

seedshope

author

2011-01-22 19:23 UTC #17 lore raw

PATCH v4 6/6 SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

Quoted 13 lines · Albert ARIBAUD

Hi seedshope,
Le 22/01/2011 02:56, seedshope a ?crit :
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 2 lines
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
Quoted 2 lines
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.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 1 line
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

Quoted 2 lines

Amicalement,

Albert ARIBAUD

2011-01-22 20:28 UTC #18 lore raw

PATCH v4 6/6 SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

Hi seedshope,

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

Quoted 1 line

Hi Amicalement

That's Albert, actually. :)

Quoted 3 lines

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.

Quoted 2 lines

Thanks
seedshope

Amicalement,

Signature · 1 line

Albert.

seedshope

author

2011-01-22 20:40 UTC #19 lore raw

PATCH v4 6/6 SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

Quoted 8 lines · Albert ARIBAUD

Hi seedshope,
Le 22/01/2011 20:23, seedshope a ?crit :
Quoted 1 line
Hi Amicalement
That's Albert, actually. :)

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 3 lines
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

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 2 lines
Thanks
seedshope
Amicalement,

Wolfgang Denk

2011-01-22 21:30 UTC #20 lore raw

PATCH v4 6/6 SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

Dear seedshope,

Quoted 4 lines · In message <[email protected]> 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

Signature · 8 lines

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 <[email protected]>

seedshope

author

2011-01-22 19:29 UTC #21 lore raw

PATCH v4 6/6 SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

In reply to Sergei Shtylyov

Quoted 26 lines · Sergei Shtylyov

Hello.
Quoted 2 lines · seedshope
Since SDRAM init function have already change, So the SDRAM initial function must be change.
This description sounds somewhat tautological...
Quoted 1 line
Signed-off-by seedshope <[email protected]>
Your real name is required in the signoff.
Quoted 13 lines
---
board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c | 10 +++++++++-
1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +0 -0
index 35aa40b..1d03b7a 100644
@@ -78,10 +78,18 @@ int board_init(void)
 return 0;
 }
 

Quoted 13 lines

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c int board_init(void) · line 92

Quoted 13 lines

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +9 -1

-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

Quoted 4 lines

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

Minkyu Kang

2011-01-22 08:26 UTC #22 lore raw

PATCH v4 6/6 SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

In reply to seedshope

Dear seedshope,

Quoted 13 lines · seedshope

Since SDRAM init function have already change, So the SDRAM initial function must be change.
Signed-off-by seedshope <[email protected]>
---
?board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c | ? 10 +++++++++- ?1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +0 -0
index 35aa40b..1d03b7a 100644

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c int board_init(void) · line 83

Quoted 7 lines

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +2 -1

@@ -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.

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c int board_init(void) · line 86

Quoted 3 lines

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +1 -0

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

Thanks
Minkyu Kang

Signature · 2 lines

from. prom.
www.promsoft.net

Thomas Langer

2011-01-22 09:15 UTC #23 lore raw

PATCH v4 6/6 SMDK6400: Fix SMDK6400 SDRAM init

In reply to seedshope

Hi seedshope,

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c int board_init(void) · line 83

Quoted 4 lines · seedshope <bocui107 <at> gmail.com> writes:

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +2 -1

-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.

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c int board_init(void) · line 88

Quoted 5 lines

board/samsung/smdk6400/smdk6400.c +3 -0

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

Best regards,
Thomas