[U-Boot] [PATCH V2 08/10] arm: socfpga: Add Altera Arria V DK support

[Marek Vasut]

On Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 11:29:32 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2015-02-09 20:09:50, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On Monday, February 02, 2015 at 08:47:52 AM, Stefan Roese wrote:
> > > On 30.01.2015 23:08, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > Add support for the Altera Arria V development kit.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex at denx.de>
> > > > Cc: Chin Liang See <clsee at opensource.altera.com>
> > > > Cc: Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen at opensource.altera.com>
> > > > Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel at denx.de>
> > > > Cc: Stefan Roese <sr at denx.de>
> > > > Cc: Vince Bridgers <vbridger at opensource.altera.com>
> > > > ---
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > > +/* The rest of the configuration is shared */
> > > > +#include <configs/socfpga_common.h>
> > > > +
> > > > +#endif	/* __CONFIG_SOCFPGA_ARRIA5_H__ */
> > > 
> > > Without really diff'ing this file with socfpga_cyclone5.h, I'm pretty
> > > sure that they share many lines. Wouldn't it make sense to move those
> > > common defines / configs to a common file instead (socfpga_common.h)?
> > 
> > Hi!
> > 
> > I agree they share a lot, but I would not recommend moving any of this
> > into socfpga_common.h . Not all boards which include socfpga_common.h
> > will want all that's common between socfpga_cyclone5.h and
> > socfpga_arria5.h as well.
> > 
> > We need to switch to DM really soon, since without DM, we cannot really
> > make any "common" configuration. The socfpga_cyclone5.h file in fact
> > represents a configuration for SoCDK with Cyclone 5, same for Arria 5.
> > 
> > Unless you have any suggestion, I'd just apply this stuff as is for now
> > with the note that these config files must be cleaned up once DM is in
> > place. Or do you have any suggestions please ?
> 
> Could we simply have socfpga_common_5.h which stuff that is shared
> between cyclone and arrira?

Hi!

I think we can improve this later. In the end, the structure should be either
the way DTs are structured in kernel OR we should have just one single config
for all SoCFPGA boards. The later is of course preferred.

For now, I'm tempted to apply this as-is so we at least have the groundwork in
place and can move on from that. What do you say ?

Best regards,
Marek Vasut