[U-Boot] sf: Discussion on quad changes

[Gerhard Sittig]

[ Cc: list heavily trimmed ]

On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 11:01 -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> 
> I don't have strong opinions on this, but do have a question. How
> about board-level configuration? Some boards may use device tree to
> indicate which SPI pins / features are available. Perhaps the
> configuration could have 'detect' option also. But in many cases I
> would expect that the board vendor would know what is supported, and
> any 'sf' options should respect that.

Yes, just like the Linux kernel supports device tree specs
whether to use hardware handshake for UARTs, modem control
signals, maximum frequencies for SPI transfers, FIFO partitions
depending on expected data volume and transfer rates, etc (all
options that cannot get determined from detected chips alone),
there certainly should be the opportunity to limit the use of
advanced SPI communication features in case those don't work or
are not applicable.  Regardless whether it's device tree or some
other source of information.

The current state may be a good starting point, but with any
automatic approach that is so optimistic yet ignores involved
components I'd expect issues in the near future.  There must be
some way for users to limit this greed. :)  Or defaults should be
more conservative if operation is not to get broken, and higher
performance should explicitly get requested.


virtually yours
Gerhard Sittig
-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr. 5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80  Email: office at denx.de