Hi Matthias,
On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 11:30 AM Matthias Schiffer matthias.schiffer@ew.tq-group.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
for the submission of support for our TQMa6UL/TQMa6ULL SoM family I've been wondering if it would be desirable to allow U-Boot configs that support both i.MX6UL and i.MX6ULL. This would allow us to reduce the number of required defconfig variants for our SoMs significantly.
I had a look at the differences between these configurations, and most of the code already treats both SoCs the same (lots of "#if defined(CONFIG_MX6UL) || defined(CONFIG_MX6ULL)"). The differences are sufficiently small that it seems easy to change them to use runtime detection for the SoC variant (and maybe not even leave CONFIG_MX6UL and CONFIG_MX6ULL as separate config symbols):
- MX6UL selects HAS_CAAM. Runtime detection should already work (will
double-check)
- Fuse support: Easy to switch to runtime detection
- mx6ul_pins.h vs. mx6ull_pins.h: Mostly identical. Only definitions
for GPIO5 differ (and none of the differing definitions are used at all)
I can propose patches for these changes if you think that it is a good idea.
Yes, that would be helpful. Please go ahead.
Thanks