[U-Boot] Update and Cut down mach types

[Igor Grinberg]

On 04/27/11 13:19, Michael Schwingen wrote:

> Am 04/26/2011 11:38 PM, schrieb Reinhard Meyer:
>>>> So IMO, if we have mach-types in U-Boot for supporting Linux, then we
>>>> should keep using a (reasonably) up-to-date Linux machine ID list just
>>>> like we do now -- mach-types that disappear from the list mean Linux
>>>> support has become useless for that machine in U-Boot. And if we have
>>>> our own mach-type policy, different from "has linux support", then we
>>>> need to specify what this policy is and how it is implemented.
>>> I think we should be gentle to users of existing code and avoid
>>> breaking it. From now on, we could establish a policy that a mach-id
>>> can only be referenced when and as long mainline Linux support for
>>> this board exists.
>>>
>>> I'm open for suggestions.
>>
>> Hi Wolfgang, Albert,
>>
>> why don't we just create the #define MACH_xxx lines directly from the
>> "http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/machines/download.php". We don't
>> need all the *_is_* macros in u-boot anyway. Then we would have just a
>> few 1000
>> lines of #define MACH_*
>>
> I had already proposed that - after all, that is the way Linux does it
> as well: the mach-types.h file is auto-generated from that list (or now
> from a cut-down version of that list), so directly using the original
> list to generate the .h file in u-boot would completely cut out the
> middle man.
>
> This would have multiple advantages IMHO:
>
>  - the downloaded file is terse: only one line per machine, compared
> with the current mach-types.h where one added machine generates lots of
> lines (most of which we do not need at all!). Reviewing a patch that
> pulls in a new upstream version would be easier with the original file
> instead of the .h file.
>
>  - Newly added machines turn up much earlier. When bringing up a new
> board, you will usually work on u-boot first. Having to wait until the
> machine ID trickles down into the Linux kernel, and *then* gets pulled
> into u-boot at some later time, makes for a substantial delay until
> board patches can be submitted to u-boot.
>
> - It would actually save space:
> 138803 Apr 27 12:12 mach-types   (freshly downloaded, complete
> unfiltered list)
> 1177444 Apr  5 20:55 ./arch/arm/include/asm/mach-types.h  (from u-boot
> master, before the patch that removes boards)
>
> - There would be no problem with removing boards that are supported in
> u-boot, but not in Linux mainline - we would have the IDs for all known
> boards, while still saving space.
>
> I do think the maintenance effort when using the original mach-types
> file would be lower than with the current system. However, when I
> proposed this before,

+1 to all said above, though some minor patching should be done:

u-boot $ grep -rn machine_is_ --exclude=mach-types.h *
arch/arm/cpu/arm920t/at91rm9200/ether.c:204:    if (machine_is_csb337()) {
board/ti/omap1610inn/omap1610innovator.c:66:    if (machine_is_omap_h2())
board/ti/omap1610inn/omap1610innovator.c:68:    else if (machine_is_omap_innovator())


-- 
Regards,
Igor.