[PATCH] net: dwc_eth_qos: add Kconfig option to select supported configuration

[Marek Vasut]

On 6/10/20 8:58 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 08:55:36PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 6/10/20 8:52 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 08:42:20PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>> On 6/10/20 8:10 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 11:27:19AM +0200, Patrick Delaunay wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Add configuration flag to select the supported dwc driver configuration:
>>>>>> - CONFIG_DWC_ETH_QOS_TEGRA186
>>>>>> - CONFIG_DWC_ETH_QOS_IMX
>>>>>> - CONFIG_DWC_ETH_QOS_STM32
>>>>>>
>>>>>> See Linux driver ethernet/stmicro/stmmac and associated glue layers
>>>>>> for other configuration examples.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This patch removes the not-selected compatibles and lets the linker remove
>>>>>> the unused functions to reduce the size of the driver.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Patrick Delaunay <patrick.delaunay at st.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I propose this patch after Marek's remark in [1].
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is also linked to [2] to limit the STM32 glue for ST compatible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] net: dwc_eth_qos: Make clk_rx and clk_tx optional
>>>>>>     http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20200512095603.29126-5-david.wu@rock-chips.com/#2432595
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [2] net: dwc_eth_qos: update the compatible supported for STM32
>>>>>>     http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/list/?series=176917
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  drivers/net/Kconfig       | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>>>>>>  drivers/net/dwc_eth_qos.c | 12 +++++++++---
>>>>>>  2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/Kconfig b/drivers/net/Kconfig
>>>>>> index 0b08de0ef4..c4b3667d3b 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/net/Kconfig
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/Kconfig
>>>>>> @@ -156,9 +156,30 @@ config DWC_ETH_QOS
>>>>>>  	help
>>>>>>  	  This driver supports the Synopsys Designware Ethernet QOS (Quality
>>>>>>  	  Of Service) IP block. The IP supports many options for bus type,
>>>>>> -	  clocking/reset structure, and feature list. This driver currently
>>>>>> -	  supports the specific configuration used in NVIDIA's Tegra186 chip,
>>>>>> -	  but should be extensible to other combinations quite easily.
>>>>>> +	  clocking/reset structure, and feature list.
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +config DWC_ETH_QOS_IMX
>>>>>> +	bool "Synopsys DWC Ethernet QOS device support for IMX"
>>>>>> +	depends on DWC_ETH_QOS
>>>>>> +	help
>>>>>> +	  The Synopsys Designware Ethernet QOS IP block with the specific
>>>>>> +	  configuration used in IMX soc.
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +config DWC_ETH_QOS_STM32
>>>>>> +	bool "Synopsys DWC Ethernet QOS device support for STM32"
>>>>>> +	depends on DWC_ETH_QOS
>>>>>> +	default y if ARCH_STM32MP
>>>>>> +	help
>>>>>> +	  The Synopsys Designware Ethernet QOS IP block with the specific
>>>>>> +	  configuration used in STM32MP soc.
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +config DWC_ETH_QOS_TEGRA186
>>>>>> +	bool "Synopsys DWC Ethernet QOS device support for TEGRA186"
>>>>>> +	depends on DWC_ETH_QOS
>>>>>> +	default y if TEGRA186
>>>>>> +	help
>>>>>> +	  The Synopsys Designware Ethernet QOS IP block with specific
>>>>>> +	  configuration used in NVIDIA's Tegra186 chip.
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>  config E1000
>>>>>>  	bool "Intel PRO/1000 Gigabit Ethernet support"
>>>>>
>>>>> I like this idea.  But, is there a reason to have more than one of these
>>>>> enabled?  Assuming not, we should do this as a choice I think so it'll
>>>>> be clear to the next SoC that they'll need to add this table right away.
>>>>
>>>> Should we be able to enable different settings in U-Boot and in SPL ,
>>>> e.g. for the use case where the SPL is the same on different SoCs, while
>>>> the U-Boot binary is not ?
>>>
>>> You mean be more like barebox and Linux where the board-specific stuff
>>> is kicked up one level and we have a more generic binary?  I don't know
>>> and there's so much work that would be required before having to move
>>> this from a Kconfig choice to just Kconfig options I don't see that as
>>> being a relevant question here.
>>>
>>> Or did I misunderstand the question?
>>
>> More like automatically have a Kconfig option generate it's _SPL and
>> _TPL variant.
> 
> Ah.  Well, that is rephrasing my first question.  Would it ever make
> sense to have more than one of these enabled?

For some sort of universal SPL, maybe ?