[U-Boot] [PATCH 4/6] EEYNOS: Add SMDK5250 board support

[Chander Kashyap]

Dear Minkyu Kang,

On 27 December 2011 14:18, Chander Kashyap <chander.kashyap at linaro.org> wrote:
> Dear minkyu Kang
>
> On 23 December 2011 11:21, Chander Kashyap <chander.kashyap at linaro.org> wrote:
>> Dear Minkyu Kang,
>>
>> On 23 December 2011 09:51, Minkyu Kang <promsoft at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Chander Kashyap,
>>>
>>> On 22 December 2011 19:52, Chander Kashyap <chander.kashyap at linaro.org> wrote:
>>> > SMDK5250 board is based on Samsungs EXYNOS5250 SoC.
>>> >
>>> > Signed-off-by: Chander Kashyap <chander.kashyap at linaro.org>
>>> > ---
>>> >  MAINTAINERS                                      |    1 +
>>> >  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/exynos/clock.c                |   24 +-
>>> >  arch/arm/include/asm/arch-exynos/clock.h         |  232 +--------
>>> >  arch/arm/include/asm/arch-exynos/clock_exynos4.h |  255 +++++++++
>>> >  arch/arm/include/asm/arch-exynos/clock_exynos5.h |  352 +++++++++++++
>>> >  arch/arm/include/asm/arch-exynos/cpu.h           |   71 ++--
>>> >  arch/arm/include/asm/arch-exynos/cpu_exynos4.h   |   51 ++
>>> >  arch/arm/include/asm/arch-exynos/cpu_exynos5.h   |   39 ++
>>> >  arch/arm/include/asm/arch-exynos/gpio.h          |   51 ++-
>>> >  board/samsung/smdk5250/Makefile                  |   48 ++
>>> >  board/samsung/smdk5250/lowlevel_init.S           |  524 +++++++++++++++++++
>>> >  board/samsung/smdk5250/mem_setup.S               |  600 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> >  board/samsung/smdk5250/smdk5250.c                |  125 +++++
>>> >  board/samsung/smdk5250/smdk5250_setup.h          |  583 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>> >  boards.cfg                                       |    1 +
>>> >  include/configs/smdk5250.h                       |  182 +++++++
>>> >  16 files changed, 2867 insertions(+), 272 deletions(-)
>>> >  create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/arch-exynos/clock_exynos4.h
>>> >  create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/arch-exynos/clock_exynos5.h
>>> >  create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/arch-exynos/cpu_exynos4.h
>>> >  create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/arch-exynos/cpu_exynos5.h
>>> >  create mode 100644 board/samsung/smdk5250/Makefile
>>> >  create mode 100644 board/samsung/smdk5250/lowlevel_init.S
>>> >  create mode 100644 board/samsung/smdk5250/mem_setup.S
>>> >  create mode 100644 board/samsung/smdk5250/smdk5250.c
>>> >  create mode 100644 board/samsung/smdk5250/smdk5250_setup.h
>>> >  create mode 100644 include/configs/smdk5250.h
>>>
>>> Please split this patch for board and SoC.
>>
>> Ok
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
>>> > index a56ca10..abf88be 100644
>>> > --- a/MAINTAINERS
>>> > +++ b/MAINTAINERS
>>> > @@ -704,6 +704,7 @@ Chander Kashyap <k.chander at samsung.com>
>>> >
>>> >        origen                  ARM ARMV7 (EXYNOS4210 SoC)
>>> >        SMDKV310                ARM ARMV7 (EXYNOS4210 SoC)
>>> > +       SMDK5250                ARM ARMV7 (EXYNOS5250 SoC)
>>> >
>>> >  Torsten Koschorrek <koschorrek at synertronixx.de>
>>> >        scb9328         ARM920T (i.MXL)
>>> > diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/exynos/clock.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/exynos/clock.c
>>> > index b101f96..88e2fc0 100644
>>> > --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/exynos/clock.c
>>> > +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/exynos/clock.c
>>> > @@ -125,10 +125,14 @@ static unsigned long exynos_get_pwm_clk(void)
>>> >
>>> >        if (s5p_get_cpu_rev() == 0) {
>>> >                /*
>>> > -                * CLK_SRC_PERIL0
>>> > +                * CLK_SRC_{PERIL0 | PERIC0}
>>> >                 * PWM_SEL [27:24]
>>> >                 */
>>> > +#ifdef CONFIG_EXYNOS5
>>> > +               sel = readl(&clk->src_peric0);
>>> > +#else
>>> >                sel = readl(&clk->src_peril0);
>>> > +#endif
>>>
>>> NAK.
>>> We don't allow to using ifdef for separating SoCs.
>>> Please refer s5pc1xx case for solve it.
>>> This comment apply to this patch globally.
>>> Please remove '#ifdef CONFIG_EXYNOS5'.
>>>
>> I have tried to reuse the code. It is possible to remove
>> #ifdef CONFIG_EXYNOS5' in clock.c with cpu_is_s5pcXXX check.
>> Is it a acceptable solution? Or is it necessary to write SoC specific function
>> in clock.c as done in case of s5pc1xx/clock.c.
>>
>> Please Advice
> Removing CONFIG_EXYNOS5 and following s5pc1xx case will not allow to
> reuse the code in clock.c.
> What is the technical hindrance of not using ifdefs?
>
> What are yours comments regarding this issue?
Any comments regrading the above discussion ?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>> Minkyu Kang.
>>> --
>>> from. prom.
>>> www.promsoft.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> with warm regards,
>> Chander Kashyap
>
>
>
> --
> with warm regards,
> Chander Kashyap



-- 
with warm regards,
Chander Kashyap