[U-Boot-Users] TI DaVinci merge, was: uboot custodian question

[Dirk Behme]

ksi at koi8.net wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Aug 2007, Dirk Behme wrote:
...
>> So, looking at DaVinci, I can at least identify three patchsets floating
>> around, not sure if and what the relationship is between them.
>>
>> 1. (Original?) patch from Ksi:
>>
>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/27603
>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/27604
>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/27605
>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/28314
>>
>> I think these are the patches mentioned in
>>
>> http://www.denx.de/wiki/UBoot/PatchStatus
...
>> A short discussion with Philip Balister showed some basic requirements
>> for a merge candidate: At least support for TMS320DM6446 based DV-EVM 
>> with default/basic NOR and EMIF configuration. Further, it would be 
>> nice if
>> the initial work is easily extendable to machines beyond the EVM. May 
>> be we
>> need to split the processor stuff off from the board stuff so that it 
>> is easy
>> to add additional boards later.
> 
> If you take a look at my patch you can find that it works at least on 3
> different boards. It has a separate CPU directory and it is very easy to
> extend for a new board (as a matter of fact it should work on any board 
> with
> minor changes if any.) We do run it on 2 additional boards since it's been
> posted.
> 
> Also it is _FULLY_ working port, with all the peripherals properly 
> supported
> and DV-EVM is just _A_ target, not _THE_ target. Both NOR and NAND flash
> supported. For NAND both small and large page devices supported with full
> hardware-assisted ECC fully compatible with Linux MTD implementation.

Sounds good! Many thanks for summarizing this again for everybody who 
missed your older infos!

Looking at your patches, some quick thoughts. Most of them are really 
minor ones:

- While they still apply against recent git, would be good to update 
them to cleanly apply. There is a newer mach-types.h as well.

- There are some #if 0 and #if 1 throughout the code. I think Peter 
would like to see this fixed.

- Do we really need an additional types.h 
include/asm-arm/arch-tms320dm6446/types.h?

- Why not calling the directories

cpu/arm926ejs/tms320dm6446/
include/asm-arm/arch-tms320dm6446/

"davinci" instead? davinci sounds more generic.

- Not sure about this, but instead of introducing additional

nand.c nand_defs.h

is there a chance to use more from the existing NAND code?

- Any chance to reuse anything from drivers/ns8382x.c for DP83848?

Do you like to split the patches in smaller chunks (main stuff, 
drivers) and then sending them unzipped (except mach-types.h) as plain 
text to the list? Maybe this could help people to directly comment.

Best regards

Dirk