[U-Boot] [PATCH u-boot git] there are non-DM6446 DaVinci chips

[Hugo Villeneuve]

On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 23:31:12 -0700
David Brownell <david-b at pacbell.net> wrote:

> On Thursday 16 April 2009, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > On 15:44 Sun 12 Apr     , David Brownell wrote:
> 
> > could you split it in more logical change please
> 
> I'll fragment it a bit more, ok.  later.
> 
> 
> > > @@ -129,10 +122,12 @@ void davinci_enable_uart0(void)
> > >  	lpsc_on(DAVINCI_LPSC_UART0);
> > >  
> > >  	/* Bringup UART0 out of reset */
> > > -	REG(UART0_PWREMU_MGMT) = 0x0000e003;
> > > +	REG(UART0_PWREMU_MGMT) = 0x00006001;
> > >  
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SOC_DM6446
> > >  	/* Enable UART0 MUX lines */
> > > -	REG(PINMUX1) |= PINMUX1_UART0;
> > > +	REG(PINMUX1) |= DM644X_PINMUX1_UART0;
> >
> > is this the same for all DM6446?
> > and the same question for the I2C and EMAC
> 
> Yes, that's why I did it that way.  PINMUX1 is part
> of the DM6446 SoC itself, not an FPGA or CPLD, and
> on other SoCs the bits in that register have different
> meanings assigned.  UART0 might be in PINMUX4, etc.
> 
> (Or, if by "this" you meant the PWREMU_MGMT register,
> that's also a yes ... plus, I looked at docs for other
> DaVinci chips, and they all have the same definition
> for that register.)

Hi David,
I would suggest renaming (or adding) CONFIG_SOC_DM6446 to CONFIG_SOC_DM644x and also introducing CONFIG_SOC_DM35x, so that we don't have to add a switch statement with all the variants inside one family.

Hugo V.