[U-Boot] [PATCHv4 3/3] ARM64: poplar: hi3798cv200: u-boot support for Poplar 96Boards

[Jorge Ramirez]

On 05/25/2017 10:31 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 08:38:47PM +0200, Jorge Ramirez wrote:
>> On 05/18/2017 12:06 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>>>> having platform data.
>>>>> No, I think we're going for overkill here by not doing serial_pl01x.c as
>>>>> platform data.  ns16550 does platform data for this already.  This
>>>>> sounds like the lowest overhead way to get the clock populated and not
>>>>> have some DT data that's not going to be accepted upstream.
>>>>>
>>>> ummmm I am a bit lost at this point, could we recap please?
>>> Lets update the recap:
>>> - Please re-submit the dts file, now with whatever form is in v4.12-rc1,
>>>    saying as such in the commit (if it's just the commit message that
>>>    changes, that's fine and great).
>> The DTS file in v4.12-rc2 still does NOT contain the usb node.
>>
>> ==> Should I then not use the DM on USB so I can avoid DTS changes?
> Well, you can either put it in the -u-boot.dtsi file for the board, and
> remove that later once it's upstream.

yes I'll do that. thanks.

>
>>> - Please update serial_pl01x.c to be able to get the clock via platform
>>>    data, update and test your board to confirm it works.
>> um, It gets tricky;
>> I can not use platform_data since I can not use SERIAL_DM because
>> the device tree does have a UART node which gets picked up.
> How about disabling the node in -u-boot.dtsi for the board and then you
> can use platform data,

I dont think that would because CONFIG_OF is enabled for USB
So the kernel dtsi (not the u-boot.dtsi) that contains the uart node 
(without the clock!) will be picked by uboot and the uart will not be 
initialized....


I still think that the simplest solution is to let me merge with the 
kernel's device tree plus this u-boot.dtsi [1] and then just get rid of 
the file when possible (and the source code not the configs) would not 
need to change

https://github.com/ldts/poplar-u-boot/blob/upstream/arch/arm/dts/hi3798cv200-u-boot.dtsi 


> I think...  But Rob, this loops us back around to
> the first problem too, kind of.  Can we really just not make use of
> clock-frequency and the kernel just not use it?
>