Hello Christian,
Christian Riesch wrote:
This patch replaces the pinmuxing functions from arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c by those of arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/pinmux.c
Signed-off-by: Christian Riesch christian.riesch@omicron.at Cc: Heiko Schocher hs@denx.de Cc: Sandeep Paulraj s-paulraj@ti.com
arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c | 34 +++++++++-------------- 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c index c7ec70f..8dd897b 100644 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ #include <asm/arch/ddr2_defs.h> #include <asm/arch/emif_defs.h> #include <asm/arch/pll_defs.h> +#include <asm/arch/davinci_misc.h>
void da850_waitloop(unsigned long loopcnt) { @@ -248,6 +249,16 @@ void board_gpio_init(void) return; }
+/* UART pin muxer settings */ +static const struct pinmux_config uart_pins[] = { +#if CONFIG_SYS_NS16550_COM1 == DAVINCI_UART2_BASE
- { pinmux(0), 4, 6 },
- { pinmux(0), 4, 7 },
- { pinmux(4), 2, 4 },
- { pinmux(4), 2, 5 }
+#endif +};
int arch_cpu_init(void) { /* Unlock kick registers */ @@ -257,27 +268,8 @@ int arch_cpu_init(void) dv_maskbits(&davinci_syscfg_regs->suspsrc, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_SYSCFG_SUSPSRC);
- /* Setup Pinmux */
- da850_pinmux_ctl(0, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX0);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(1, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX1);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(2, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX2);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(3, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX3);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(4, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX4);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(5, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX5);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(6, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX6);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(7, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX7);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(8, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX8);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(9, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX9);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(10, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX10);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(11, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX11);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(12, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX12);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(13, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX13);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(14, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX14);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(15, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX15);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(16, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX16);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(17, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX17);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(18, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX18);
- da850_pinmux_ctl(19, 0xFFFFFFFF, CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX19);
- /* setup serial port */
- davinci_configure_pin_mux(uart_pins, ARRAY_SIZE(uart_pins));
Why only the uart pins? We could use here something like "board_pins" and initialize here all pins for the board?
I reworked this for the enbw_cmc board too, and removed also the CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX* defines complete ... but I am not really happy with it. Why?
We have for example on the am1808 19 * 8 = 152 pins to setup up
If using the CONFIG_SYS_DA850_PINMUX* defines we have 19 register- writes and have setup them all (And you must think about all your pins, if we use such a struct, not defined pins are in default state ... which is good or bad ...)
With using davinci_configure_pin_mux() we have 152 * (read, write and some logic operations) ... and I have to code a "static const struct pinmux_config board_pins" with 152 lines in the code ...
What do others think?
bye, Heiko