[U-Boot] [PATCH v4 11/11] dm: i2c: tegra: Convert to driver model

[Simon Glass]

Hi Masahiro,

On 10 December 2014 at 06:18, Masahiro Yamada <yamada.m at jp.panasonic.com> wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> Sorry for my late reply.
>
>
> On Fri, 5 Dec 2014 07:50:33 -0700
> Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
>
>> Sorry I didn't reply on this.
>>
>> I have been thinking about this for a while. For SPI we have the same
>> problem and I think I mentioned it in the code somewhere. For the PCI
>> RFC I have already adjusted the platdata lifecycle a little since I
>> think it will simplify all buses, and have added a another data
>> pointer for a different purpose.
>>
>> For the case you raise the problem as you say is that each driver is
>> required to provide a certain structure for its children so that its
>> uclass is happy. On the other hand the driver may want to add
>> additional information  We already have a lot of flexibility so I was
>> waiting to see how much this would really matter (there is after all a
>> complexity trade-off).
>>
>> With PCI I've made some changes and I think I'll end up adding another
>> pointer. At that point I will also want to change SPI and I2C.
>>
>> For now, I'd like to leave this alone. It does work and avoids adding
>> new features at this late stage.
>>
>> Let's revisit when I come back to PCI.
>
>
> I hope you will come back to here before it gets too late.
>
> If we have lots of drivers converted to DM
> and some of them start to have various deviations,
> it will be difficult to merge the common parts.

First priority is to move everything to Kconfig. I sent an RFC.

Second I need to figure out the platdata size of things and the
discussion above.

I am not worried about the task. So far it only affects I2C and SPI
(and PCI RFC). There are only 3-4 drivers I think. It should be fine.
The good news is that with this many uclasses we can be a lot more
confident that the design is solid and can cover U-Boot's needs.

Regards,
Simon