[PATCH v2 1/2] serial: ns16550: Revert "Move PCI access from ofdata_to_platdata() to probe()"

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 6:56 AM Ang, Chee Hong <chee.hong.ang at intel.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 7:28 PM Ang, Chee Hong <chee.hong.ang at intel.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Apr 02, 2020 at 12:55:14PM +0800, Bin Meng wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 1:55 AM Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, 1 Apr 2020 at 11:39, Andy Shevchenko

> > > > > > > > > > > This reverts commit
> > 720f9e1fdb0c92d3fd16e1bfc25bcbd35612675c.

> > > > Adding SoCFPGA folks to this thread as the first commit
> > > > (82de42fa1468) is also breaking platforms there and then their fix
> > > > for that problem is also causing problems, if I follow right.
> >
> > > Yes. This commit (82de42fa1468) breaks our A10 platform.
> > > I did submit similar patch to move some init code from ofdata_to_platdata() to
> > probe() for our clock driver as well.
> > > Check out the thread here:
> > > https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2020-April/405252.html
> >
> > I see half or less of the messages in the thread by above link.
> > Can you summarize what should have been done in order to fix this?
> 1) Fix in the driver (broken by this commit: 82de42fa1468) by moving some code from ofdata_to_platdata() to probe().
> 2) Fix the DM core.
> Simon and Marek were discussing about these 2 options.
> Perhaps Simon can help shed some light here.

I have a question. Does revert of
720f9e1fdb0c92d3fd16e1bfc25bcbd35612675c makes any difference to
SoCFPGA?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko