[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/4] dm: board: complete the initialization of the muxes in initr_dm()

[Jean-Jacques Hiblot]

On 05/11/2019 14:05, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote:
> Hi JJ,
>
> On 05/11/19 5:20 PM, Jean-Jacques Hiblot wrote:
>> This will probe the multiplexer devices that have a "u-boot,mux-autoprobe"
>> property. As a consequence they will be put in their idle state.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jean-Jacques Hiblot <jjhiblot at ti.com>
>>
>> ---
> [...]
>> diff --git a/drivers/mux/mux-uclass.c b/drivers/mux/mux-uclass.c
>> index 6aaf4dc964..71392e9e50 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mux/mux-uclass.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mux/mux-uclass.c
>> @@ -262,6 +262,28 @@ int mux_uclass_post_probe(struct udevice *dev)
>>   	return 0;
>>   }
>>   
>> +void dm_mux_init(void)
>> +{
>> +	struct uclass *uc;
>> +	struct udevice *dev;
>> +	int ret;
>> +
>> +	ret = uclass_get(UCLASS_MUX, &uc);
>> +	if (ret < 0) {
>> +		debug("unable to get MUX uclass\n");
>> +		return;
>> +	}
>> +	uclass_foreach_dev(dev, uc) {
>> +		if (dev_read_bool(dev, "u-boot,mux-autoprobe")) {
>> +			ret = device_probe(dev);
>> +			if (ret)
>> +				debug("unable to probe device %s\n", dev->name);
>> +		} else {
>> +			printf("not found for dev %s\n", dev->name);
>> +		}
> Is "u-boot,mux-autoprobe" a required property? The fact that its in DT
> makes me think its optional. If that's the case, above printf() should
> be reduced to debug() to avoid confusion

Thanks Vignesh. It was for debug and forgot to remove it.


>
>> +	}
>> +}
>> +
>>   UCLASS_DRIVER(mux) = {
>>   	.id		= UCLASS_MUX,
>>   	.name		= "mux",
>> diff --git a/include/mux.h b/include/mux.h
>> index 060f71a47c..2467723951 100644
>> --- a/include/mux.h
>> +++ b/include/mux.h
>> @@ -75,6 +75,8 @@ void mux_control_put(struct mux_control *mux);
>>   
>>   struct mux_control *devm_mux_control_get(struct udevice *dev,
>>   					 const char *mux_name);
>> +void dm_mux_init(void);
>> +
>>   #else
>>   unsigned int mux_control_states(struct mux_control *mux)
>>   {
>>