Hi,
I found some typos in this
On Friday 06 of June 2014 13:13:32 Simon Glass wrote:
The lifecycle of a device is an important part of driver model. Add to the existing documentation and clarify it.
...snip...
+This means that instead of having lots of U_BOOT_DEVICE() declarations in +the board file, we put these in the device tree. This approach allows a lot +more generality, since the same board file can support many types of boards +(e,g. with the same SoC) just by using different device trees. An added +benefit is that the Linux device tree can be used, thus further simplifying +the task of board-bring up either for U-Boot or Linux devs (whoever gets to +the baord first!).
s/baord/board/
...snip...
+Note that compared to Linux, U-Boot's driver model has a separate step of +probe/remove which is independent of bind/unbind. This is partly because in +U-Boot it may be expensive to prove devices and we don't want to do it until +they are needed, or perhaps until after relocation.
s/prove/probe/
...snip...
- d. All parent devices are probed. It is not possible to activate a
device + unless its parents (all the way up to the root device) are activated. + This means (for example) that an I2C driver will require that its bus + be activated.
s/parents/predecessors/ in a tree, a node can have up to one parent. parent of a parent (recursively) is a predecessor.
...snip...
- e. The device is marked inactive. Note that it is still bound, so the
- device structure itself is not freed at this point. Should the device be
- activated again, then the cycle starts again at step 4 above.
if there were no drastic changes since I last checked, this would go to activation/probe(), which is described in step 2
regards Pavel Herrmann