From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:6f8:1178:4:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.72 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1PbZGP-00081G-8z for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 13:55:26 +0000 Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2011 14:55:22 +0100 From: Sascha Hauer Message-ID: <20110108135522.GG12078@pengutronix.de> References: <20110106233651.GB944@game.jcrosoft.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: barebox-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ARM: Add support for IXP4xx CPU and for Goramo Multilink router platform. To: Krzysztof Halasa Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org On Sat, Jan 08, 2011 at 01:16:01PM +0100, Krzysztof Halasa wrote: > Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD writes: > > >> +/* offsets from start of flash ROM = 0x50000000 */ > >> +#define CFG_ETH0_ADDRESS 0x40 /* 6 bytes */ > > ^^^^^ > > whitespace please use tab for indent > > Is it the official requirement that I should use tabs for visual > indentation (I use tabs for syntactic indentation). It's not an official requirement. I prefer tabs here, but I never rejected a patch because of this. > > This forces anyone to display with tabs=8 (vide the discussions on > lkml). Obviously one can decide to use tabs everywhere, I just want > to see such decision has been taken. Have there been discussions? Do you have a pointer? > > >> +static struct device_d cfi_dev = { > >> + .name = "cfi_flash", > >> + .map_base = IXP4XX_EXP_BASE(0), > >> + .size = 16 * 1024 * 1024, > ^^^^^^ I.e., I use tabs here. > > >> +#define CFG_ETH1_ADDRESS 0x46 /* 6 bytes */ > ^^^^^ but not here (probably). > > >> +#define ETH_ALEN 6 > > IIR we have a macro for it > > What's its name? I think I removed it during rewriting the network stuff. > > >> +#define BAREBOX_START 0x00000 > >> +#define BAREBOX_LENGTH 0x34000 > >> +#define NPE_A_START (BAREBOX_START + BAREBOX_LENGTH) > >> +#define NPE_A_LENGTH 0x05000 > >> +#define NPE_B_START (NPE_A_START + NPE_A_LENGTH) > >> +#define NPE_B_LENGTH 0x03000 > >> +#define NPE_C_START (NPE_B_START + NPE_B_LENGTH) > >> +#define NPE_C_LENGTH 0x04000 > >> +#define NPE_ENV0_START (NPE_C_START + NPE_C_LENGTH) > >> +#define NPE_ENV0_LENGTH 0x20000 > > I prefer we use a fs to store it so we can share it Linux > > with a cramfs at least > > That means creating a CRAMFS in Barebox' two read/only blocks. Will look > at it. You could use a cramfs but it adds quite some binary size to the image. Is it even possible to share the firmware with Linux? I guess Linux does a request_firmware which either expects the firmware to be compiled in or under /lib/firmware. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox