[U-Boot-Users] Support for the ML507

[Ricardo Ribalda Delgado]

Hello again:

  I have adapted the Xilinx drivers just because there were other
examples of that behaviour on the u-boot code
(board/xilinx/xilinx_enet, board/xilinx/xilinx_iic and
board/xilinx/common) for the xilinx drivers.

  About redesigning the drivers from scratch.... Maybe is not a good
idea on FPGA soft cores. This devices made of hardware/software change
very frequently (even twice per year) and if we develop a driver from
scratch, it will be very hard to mantain. On the other hand, if we use
the "generic drivers" we just need to change them when the devices are
upgraded.

  Maybe an option will be just not give support to FPGAs boards...,
but they are used by a lot of people (students and companies). We can
have the risk that if we do not give support to that boards, the FPGAs
manufacturers will create a fork and take full control of the u-boot
roadmap (more money and resources).

  I have tried to follow the coding guidelines for all the files I
have created from scratch, but not for the drivers by xilinx.

  Best Regards

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Wolfgang Denk <wd at denx.de> wrote:
> In message <aa76a2be0807101114g67d0f099y95de772f47051107 at mail.gmail.com> you wrote:
>>
>>   So, I have spent the evening dividing the big patch in 8 independent
>> patches. I have used the git tools to prepare the patches and resend
>> them... Unfortunatelly some of this files are bigged than the 40kb
>> limit.... If the mail list administrator don't accept this parts you
>> can download the full set of patches from my website:
>> http://www.ii.uam.es/~rribalda/ml507.tgz
>
> 40 kB is the soft limit; the hard limit is 100 kB.
>
>>   Why my patches are so big... They give support to IPs by Xilinx,
>> which have some kind of generic drivers to adapt them to multiple
>
> You are aware that some similar code laready exists  in  U-Boot?  and
> that  your  patches  contain  lots  of code that will most definitely
> never be used in U-Boot?
>
>> OS... When the driver was very complex I have used this generic
>> drivers and added an adaptor. Because it does not follows the coding
>
> I have extremely little emthusiasm to add big and complex drivers that
> are intended to support many operating systems plus an adaption layer
> to a small boot loader like U-Boot.
>
> I think such drivers should be reimplemented from scratch, with
> efficiency and style in mind.
>
>> guidelines, all this drivers have been located under the board
>> directory to respect all your "clean" work.
>
> The Coding Style reqyierements apply to code in the board/ directories
> as well.
>
> And adding thsi stuff there makes it only worse, as the next similar
> board that gets added will copy the whole crap.
>
> This is bound to be unmaintainable.
>
> I *strongly* recommend to redesign and reimplement.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Wolfgang Denk
>
> --
> 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
> How much net work could a network work, if a network could net work?
>



-- 
Ricardo Ribalda
http://www.eps.uam.es/~rribalda/