[U-Boot] [BUG] booting on the Tinker Board (tinker-rk3288_defconfig) is broken

[Philipp Tomsich]

David,

> On 13.02.2019, at 11:28, David Wu <david.wu at rock-chips.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Philipp,
> 
> 在 2019/2/12 下午9:53, Philipp Tomsich 写道:
>>> On 12.02.2019, at 13:38, David Wu <david.wu at rock-chips.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Philipp,
>>> 
>>> 在 2019/2/10 上午2:24, Philipp Tomsich 写道:
>>>> That said, I have been fighting issues from this patchset when trying to read
>>>> from devices on the i2c0 bus on a RK3399—which had me add a “simple”
>>>> pinctrl device again, as pulling all the dependencies into the SPL is a pain.
>>> 
>>> I think you can also add the simple ops if necessary. Full pinctrl
>>> should only be used at the U-boot stage, or the SPL stage where the TPL is available.
>> I started on this and will submit it with the follow-on changes that depend on this, as
>> I don’t want to pull in the ~10k of extra size.
> 
> 10k is a bit exaggerated, I think I can split some common functions
> into each Soc chip file, can reduce some size.

The 10k comes from a direct comparison on our RK3399-Q7, after pulling in all
the required DTS nodes and properties vs. a minimal simple pinctrl for I2C only
(which is ~ 100 bytes of code).

> For the simple ops, do you feel like get prop from "pinctrl-0", and then
> the pinctrl process is similar to what it is now.
> 
>> There’s a number of failure modes in the SPL/TPL path from missing DTB nodes (as
>> one would need to add pre-reloc tags to all pinctrl and dependent nodes).
>>> For most boards about 3288, there is no need to enable pinctrl at SPL
>>> stage, such as Tinker board.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Unfortunately, in this merge I had to make a judgement call between insisting
>>>> on code-quality and getting the full pinctrl-driver merged.  With this release
>>>> cycle being longer and having 5 RCs, I figured we’ll have time to iron out any
>>>> wrinkles...
>>> 
>>> 
> 
>