[U-Boot] [PATCH 7/7] omap3_logic: Add Device Tree Support and more DM drivers

[Adam Ford]

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 07:40:16AM -0500, Adam Ford wrote:
>
>> The previous version of omap3_logic_defconfig supported either
>> Torpedo or SOM-LV.  Now with the device tree, there are two
>> different defconfig files:
>>
>> omap3_logic_defconfig = torpedo
>> omap3_logic_somlv_defconfig = SOM-LV
>>
>> This patch also removes all the excessive code in trying to
>> determine the differences between these boards as well as removing
>> the some of the unnecessary NS16550 intiailization as the device
>> tree can do that now.  This also adds DM_I2C and DM_MMC since
>> the overlying drivers have the built-in support already.  The
>> corresponding include/config/omap3_logic.h also reduced in size
>> due to the new device tree support.
>>
>> The device trees were sync'd with 4.9.y stable with two changes:
>> disable mmc2 and stdout-path = &uart1.  Both of those two changes
>> will be submitted to the linux-omap list.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Adam Ford <aford173 at gmail.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla at ti.com>
>
> OK, why can't we support both in a single defconfig?  And perhaps a
> README to say that if you need to support only one, modify the config as
> follows... ?  Thanks!

I can certainly do a readme file.  Is there a way to build U-Boot with
two different device tree options?  The SOM-LV and Torpedo have
separate device trees.  The original code had a mechanism to
autodetect which hardware was being used and would then select the
corresponding dtb.  With the device tree integrated into U-Boot it
seemed to me like the auto detect code didn't make sense since the
U-Boot with the corresponding DTB would have to be loaded from the
beginning.  I looked at the variety of am33xx boards, and it seemed
like different versions have different _defconfig files.  I would
prefer to have a since defconfig and separate U-Boot files generated
for each DTB, but it wasn't clear to me whether or not that was
possible.  If you have an example I can look at that and redo this to
eliminate the second defconfig.

adam
>
> --
> Tom