[U-Boot] [PATCH v3 0/8] hwconfig and some its users

[Kim Phillips]

On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 00:23:28 +0400
Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov at ru.mvista.com> wrote:

> On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 12:31:54AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Dear Anton,
> > 
> > In message <20090429215000.GA1092 at oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> you wrote:
> > > This patch implements simple hwconfig infrastructure: an
> > > interface for software knobs to control a hardware.
> > 
> > Thanks a lot.
> > 
> > > 3. We support hwconfig options with arguments. For example,
> > > 
> > >    set hwconfig dr_usb,dr_usb_mode:peripheral,dr_usb_phy_type:ulpi
> > > 
> > >    There are three hwconfig options selected:
> > >    1. dr_usb - enable Dual-Role USB controller;
> > >    2. dr_usb_mode:peripheral - USB in Function mode;
> > >    3. dr_usb_phy_type:ulpi - USB should work with ULPI PHYs.
> > 
> > That gives a lot of typing, which in turn results in lots of typing
> > errors, which in this case are probably nasty to debug.
> > 
> > Suggestion: instead of
> > 
> > 	set hwconfig dr_usb,dr_usb_mode:peripheral,dr_usb_phy_type:ulpi
> > 
> > use:
> > 
> > 	set hwconfig dr_usb:mode=peripheral,phy_type=ulpi
> > 
> > What do you think?
> 
> Sorry for the delay. Done.
> New patches on the way.

I had made a similar comment to the original hwconfig posting that
appears to have been missed:

http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-April/051845.html

the existing syntax is flawed, e.g., what is the separator character
going to be when you want to configure something more than dr_usb using
the syntax used in this patchseries?  And can we adopt a syntax that's
more familiar (or recognizable) to our users from the outset?

Kim