[U-Boot] [PATCH 3/4] spi: omap3: Convert to DM

[Jagan Teki]

On 8 February 2016 at 23:26, Jagan Teki <jteki at openedev.com> wrote:
> On 8 February 2016 at 23:10, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 11:27:21PM +0100, Christophe Ricard wrote:
>>> Hi Simon, Tom,
>>>
>>> I assume the approach you are taking is also valuable for the i2c:
>>> omap24xx patch serie:
>>> http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2016-January/241676.html
>>>
>>> What are your recommendation about the pending patches ?
>>> Should i send back only the one not taking care of the DM conversion
>>> and send another serie later ?
>>>
>>> I have seen some work ongoing on this topic on the u-boot-fdt tree
>>> on the spl-working branch.
>>> Is there a more accurate place to follow this work ?
>>
>> For i2c, aside from needing to defer removing the non-DM code for a
>> while yet, there were some review comments to address in a v2 or answer
>> as intentional.  For SPI, it's all looking good and I'm assuming Jagan
>> will have a SPI PR soon.  Thanks!
>
> Yes, by this week-end.

Any idea 4/4 got differed in patchwork [1], do we have next version
patches for these?

[1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/569241/

>
>>>
>>> On 26/01/2016 02:55, Peng Fan wrote:
>>> >Hi Simon,
>>> >
>>> >On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 06:11:24PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
>>> >>+Hans
>>> >>
>>> >>Hi Tom,
>>> >>
>>> >>On 21 January 2016 at 05:24, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
>>> >>>On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 07:46:15PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
>>> >>>>+Mugunthan, Tom
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>On 17 January 2016 at 03:56, Christophe Ricard
>>> >>>><christophe.ricard at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>Convert omap3_spi driver to DM and keep compatibility with previous
>>> >>>>>mode.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>Signed-off-by: Christophe Ricard <christophe-h.ricard at st.com>
>>> >>>>>---
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>  drivers/spi/Kconfig     |   6 +
>>> >>>>>  drivers/spi/omap3_spi.c | 439 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>>> >>>>>  drivers/spi/omap3_spi.h |  14 +-
>>> >>>>>  3 files changed, 402 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-)
>>> >>>>This is a pretty painful conversion, with lots of #ifdefs. I think it
>>> >>>>would be possible to use a common pointer type and reduce this.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>But perhaps it does not matter - how long must we be in the state of
>>> >>>>supporting legacy SPI? Can we convert all TI boards to driver model?
>>> >>>We _really_ need some way to support more than one board per binary
>>> >>>before we can move everything to DM only.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>I think we can kind of do this today if we stick to using platform data
>>> >>>for everything that's board-specific rather than SoC-defined.  What we
>>> >>>talked about at ELCE was auto-generating the pdata from the device tree,
>>> >>>I think.
>>> >>We discussed this on IRC but since that doesn't exist as far as the
>>> >>mailing list is concerned...
>>> >>
>>> >>The current plan is:
>>> >>
>>> >>- Adjust build system to optionally build a u-boot.img in FIT format
>>> >>that includes the U-Boot binary and >1 device tree files
>>> >>- Adjust SPL to load this
>>> >>- Add a way for SPL to determine which device tree to select (by
>>> >>calling a board-specific function)
>>> >>- Have SPL pass this selected device tree to U-Boot when it starts
>>> >Can dtb be sperated from the final u-boot.img, if using SPL?
>>> >I mean let SPL load the u-boot.img and the dtb to correct DRAM address.
>>> >And the dtb is shared with linux kernel.
>>> >
>>> >Regards,
>>> >Peng.
>>> >>Thus we should be able to support more than one board with a single
>>> >>U-Boot image. Of course this is not a perfect solution (e.g. it is
>>> >>inefficient since the DTs are likely to be largely the same) but it
>>> >>should be a good first step.
>>> >>
>>> >>I'm going to try this out with sunxi initially and plan to get some
>>> >>patches out by the end of the week.

-- 
Jagan.