[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3: Introduce CONFIG option for power code
Some OMAP3 boards need control for external power companion chips. Introduce a CONFIG option for this, to avoid Makefile changes for each board.
Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme dirk.behme@googlemail.com ---
Compile tested with ./MAKEALL ARM_CORTEX_A8, boot tested on OMAP3 based BeagleBoard.
Note: This patch trys to fix the first comment of
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-April/051383.html
board/omap3/common/Makefile | 5 +---- doc/README.omap3 | 11 +++++++++++ include/configs/omap3_beagle.h | 1 + include/configs/omap3_overo.h | 1 + include/configs/omap3_pandora.h | 1 + include/configs/omap3_zoom1.h | 1 + 6 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Index: u-boot-main/doc/README.omap3 =================================================================== --- u-boot-main.orig/doc/README.omap3 +++ u-boot-main/doc/README.omap3 @@ -77,6 +77,17 @@ For all other commands see
help
+Custom configs +============== + +CONFIG_OMAP3_POWER + +Some OMAP3 boards use external power companion chips to be configured. Enable +this CONFIG option in your board specific configuration file if your board +uses such a companion chip. + +This enables compilation of board/omap3/common/power.c. + Acknowledgements ================
Index: u-boot-main/board/omap3/common/Makefile =================================================================== --- u-boot-main.orig/board/omap3/common/Makefile +++ u-boot-main/board/omap3/common/Makefile @@ -29,10 +29,7 @@ endif
LIB = $(obj)lib$(VENDOR).a
-COBJS-$(CONFIG_OMAP3_BEAGLE) += power.o -COBJS-$(CONFIG_OMAP3_OVERO) += power.o -COBJS-$(CONFIG_OMAP3_PANDORA) += power.o -COBJS-$(CONFIG_OMAP3_ZOOM1) += power.o +COBJS-$(CONFIG_OMAP3_POWER) += power.o
COBJS := $(COBJS-y) SRCS := $(COBJS:.o=.c) Index: u-boot-main/include/configs/omap3_beagle.h =================================================================== --- u-boot-main.orig/include/configs/omap3_beagle.h +++ u-boot-main/include/configs/omap3_beagle.h @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ #define CONFIG_OMAP34XX 1 /* which is a 34XX */ #define CONFIG_OMAP3430 1 /* which is in a 3430 */ #define CONFIG_OMAP3_BEAGLE 1 /* working with BEAGLE */ +#define CONFIG_OMAP3_POWER 1 /* use power code */
#include <asm/arch/cpu.h> /* get chip and board defs */ #include <asm/arch/omap3.h> Index: u-boot-main/include/configs/omap3_overo.h =================================================================== --- u-boot-main.orig/include/configs/omap3_overo.h +++ u-boot-main/include/configs/omap3_overo.h @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ #define CONFIG_OMAP34XX 1 /* which is a 34XX */ #define CONFIG_OMAP3430 1 /* which is in a 3430 */ #define CONFIG_OMAP3_OVERO 1 /* working with overo */ +#define CONFIG_OMAP3_POWER 1 /* use power code */
#include <asm/arch/cpu.h> /* get chip and board defs */ #include <asm/arch/omap3.h> Index: u-boot-main/include/configs/omap3_pandora.h =================================================================== --- u-boot-main.orig/include/configs/omap3_pandora.h +++ u-boot-main/include/configs/omap3_pandora.h @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ #define CONFIG_OMAP34XX 1 /* which is a 34XX */ #define CONFIG_OMAP3430 1 /* which is in a 3430 */ #define CONFIG_OMAP3_PANDORA 1 /* working with pandora */ +#define CONFIG_OMAP3_POWER 1 /* use power code */
#include <asm/arch/cpu.h> /* get chip and board defs */ #include <asm/arch/omap3.h> Index: u-boot-main/include/configs/omap3_zoom1.h =================================================================== --- u-boot-main.orig/include/configs/omap3_zoom1.h +++ u-boot-main/include/configs/omap3_zoom1.h @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ #define CONFIG_OMAP34XX 1 /* which is a 34XX */ #define CONFIG_OMAP3430 1 /* which is in a 3430 */ #define CONFIG_OMAP3_ZOOM1 1 /* working with Zoom MDK Rev1 */ +#define CONFIG_OMAP3_POWER 1 /* use power code */
#include <asm/arch/cpu.h> /* get chip and board defs */ #include <asm/arch/omap3.h>
On 17:21 Wed 06 May , Dirk Behme wrote:
Some OMAP3 boards need control for external power companion chips. Introduce a CONFIG option for this, to avoid Makefile changes for each board.
please also move it to cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/
omap3 and davinci is not a vendor so common code will need to go to drivers or cpu/<arch>/<soc> for the davinci it's already start to move to it
Best Regards, J.
Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme dirk.behme@googlemail.com
Compile tested with ./MAKEALL ARM_CORTEX_A8, boot tested on OMAP3 based BeagleBoard.
Note: This patch trys to fix the first comment of
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-April/051383.html
board/omap3/common/Makefile | 5 +---- doc/README.omap3 | 11 +++++++++++ include/configs/omap3_beagle.h | 1 + include/configs/omap3_overo.h | 1 + include/configs/omap3_pandora.h | 1 + include/configs/omap3_zoom1.h | 1 + 6 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Index: u-boot-main/doc/README.omap3
--- u-boot-main.orig/doc/README.omap3 +++ u-boot-main/doc/README.omap3 @@ -77,6 +77,17 @@ For all other commands see
help
+Custom configs +==============
+CONFIG_OMAP3_POWER
+Some OMAP3 boards use external power companion chips to be configured. Enable +this CONFIG option in your board specific configuration file if your board +uses such a companion chip.
could you name it ine the config and the file name
Best Regards, J.
Dear Jean-Christophe,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
On 17:21 Wed 06 May , Dirk Behme wrote:
Some OMAP3 boards need control for external power companion chips. Introduce a CONFIG option for this, to avoid Makefile changes for each board.
please also move it to cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/
omap3 and davinci is not a vendor so common code will need to go to drivers or cpu/<arch>/<soc>
No, this wouldn't be correct. We used board/omap3/common/ for this intentionally.
We talk about *board* specific code here, it is totally unrelated to <arch> or the <soc> we use. This board specific code configures an OMAP3 (SoC) external companion chip which is on the board (or not). Some boards which share the basic layout have this companion chip, some not. Please note that original config options (we remove with this patch) were the *board* config options (e.g. CONFIG_OMAP3_BEAGLE) to enable the compilation of power.c, too.
Best Regards, J.
I nearly missed your comment below because of this ;)
Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme dirk.behme@googlemail.com
Compile tested with ./MAKEALL ARM_CORTEX_A8, boot tested on OMAP3 based BeagleBoard.
Note: This patch trys to fix the first comment of
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-April/051383.html
board/omap3/common/Makefile | 5 +---- doc/README.omap3 | 11 +++++++++++ include/configs/omap3_beagle.h | 1 + include/configs/omap3_overo.h | 1 + include/configs/omap3_pandora.h | 1 + include/configs/omap3_zoom1.h | 1 + 6 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Index: u-boot-main/doc/README.omap3
--- u-boot-main.orig/doc/README.omap3 +++ u-boot-main/doc/README.omap3 @@ -77,6 +77,17 @@ For all other commands see
help
+Custom configs +==============
+CONFIG_OMAP3_POWER
+Some OMAP3 boards use external power companion chips to be configured. Enable +this CONFIG option in your board specific configuration file if your board +uses such a companion chip.
could you name it ine the config and the file name
Sorry, I don't understand what you want here. What should I name where? Which file name?
Dirk
On 17:27 Fri 08 May , Dirk Behme wrote:
Dear Jean-Christophe,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
On 17:21 Wed 06 May , Dirk Behme wrote:
Some OMAP3 boards need control for external power companion chips. Introduce a CONFIG option for this, to avoid Makefile changes for each board.
please also move it to cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/
omap3 and davinci is not a vendor so common code will need to go to drivers or cpu/<arch>/<soc>
No, this wouldn't be correct. We used board/omap3/common/ for this intentionally.
no the current omap3 layout is wrong
it's board/<soc>
but it's supposed to be board/<vendor>
as davinci which is starting to be clean
We talk about *board* specific code here, it is totally unrelated to <arch> or the <soc> we use. This board specific code configures an OMAP3 (SoC) external companion chip which is on the board (or not). Some boards which share the basic layout have this companion chip, some not. Please note that original config options (we remove with this patch) were the *board* config options (e.g. CONFIG_OMAP3_BEAGLE) to enable the compilation of power.c, too.
as show now the power.c code is shared by a lot's of omap3 boards and as you said it's a power companion for the omap3
so 2 choices move the code to cpu/omap3 as it's omap3 specific or to drivers/
help +Custom configs +==============
+CONFIG_OMAP3_POWER
+Some OMAP3 boards use external power companion chips to be configured. Enable +this CONFIG option in your board specific configuration file if your board +uses such a companion chip.
could you name it ine the config and the file name
Sorry, I don't understand what you want here. What should I name where? Which file name?
the name of the companion chip as you can use different one
Best Regards, J.
Dear Jean-Christophe,,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
On 17:27 Fri 08 May , Dirk Behme wrote:
Dear Jean-Christophe,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
On 17:21 Wed 06 May , Dirk Behme wrote:
Some OMAP3 boards need control for external power companion chips. Introduce a CONFIG option for this, to avoid Makefile changes for each board.
please also move it to cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/
omap3 and davinci is not a vendor so common code will need to go to drivers or cpu/<arch>/<soc>
No, this wouldn't be correct. We used board/omap3/common/ for this intentionally.
no
Yes ;) Yes, we use the directory board/omap3/common/ intentionally.
the current omap3 layout is wrong
Sorry, but I can't follow your argumentation here any more. Above, you proposed to move the power code to cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/. So I understand the topic we talk about is "where to locate the file power.c". Now, you mention that you think the layout of the directory board/omap3 is wrong (?). This looks like two different discussion topics to me, how is this related?
it's board/<soc>
but it's supposed to be board/<vendor>
Where do you get this supposing from? Looking at /board I find there e.g.
sbc2410x sbc405 sbc8240 sbc8260 sbc8349 etc. etc.
and I don't think these are <vendor>?
as davinci which is starting to be clean
Sorry, but I can't find any board/ti which would be board/<vendor> you mention above. Even not for davinci. I looked into u-boot-arm-master and -next.
But what I can find in both trees are
board/davinci/common board/davinci/dvevm board/davinci/schmoogie board/davinci/<all other Davinci boards>
This is 100% the same layout we use for OMAP3 boards. Looks fine to me.
We talk about *board* specific code here, it is totally unrelated to <arch> or the <soc> we use. This board specific code configures an OMAP3 (SoC) external companion chip which is on the board (or not). Some boards which share the basic layout have this companion chip, some not. Please note that original config options (we remove with this patch) were the *board* config options (e.g. CONFIG_OMAP3_BEAGLE) to enable the compilation of power.c, too.
as show now the power.c code is shared by a lot's of omap3 boards and as you said it's a power companion for the omap3
so 2 choices move the code to cpu/omap3 as it's omap3 specific
No and no. Above I mentioned why cpu/ is wrong (because it's board related code) and that it's not OMAP3 (SoC) specific. It's (OMAP3) *board* specific.
or to drivers/
Driver makes no sense either, because it's not a driver. Power.c *uses* drivers e.g. I2C (like the board code) to access board components. If you would move power.c to drivers, it would be similar if you would move everything in board/* to drivers.
Please have a look to code in board/davinci/common. These are no drivers, too. It's board code, which normally is in board/davinci/<board>/<board>.c file, but is moved to /common to avoid copy & paste. Same is with OMAP3 power.c code. It was originally in board/omap3/<board>/<board>.c file, but you (correctly) asked to move it to a common place to avoid copy & paste. If you like, we can move it back into <board>.c files ;)
help +Custom configs +==============
+CONFIG_OMAP3_POWER
+Some OMAP3 boards use external power companion chips to be configured. Enable +this CONFIG option in your board specific configuration file if your board +uses such a companion chip.
could you name it ine the config and the file name
Sorry, I don't understand what you want here. What should I name where? Which file name?
the name of the companion chip as you can use different one
You mean I shall mention the name of the companion chip(s) in the above README.omap3 and the power.c, correct? (just to get this understanding right)
Yes, I can do this. Unfortunately, you can't imagine how clever TI is with selling mainly the same functionality (chips) with different chip names. So most probably there is more than on chip name, and I'm not sure if I will get them right. Most probably only TI marketing department will get this right ;)
Best regards
Dirk
as davinci which is starting to be clean
Sorry, but I can't find any board/ti which would be board/<vendor> you mention above. Even not for davinci. I looked into u-boot-arm-master and -next.
and the code is start to be moved
But what I can find in both trees are
board/davinci/common board/davinci/dvevm board/davinci/schmoogie board/davinci/<all other Davinci boards>
This is 100% the same layout we use for OMAP3 boards. Looks fine to me.
not to me
We talk about *board* specific code here, it is totally unrelated to <arch> or the <soc> we use. This board specific code configures an OMAP3 (SoC) external companion chip which is on the board (or not). Some boards which share the basic layout have this companion chip, some not. Please note that original config options (we remove with this patch) were the *board* config options (e.g. CONFIG_OMAP3_BEAGLE) to enable the compilation of power.c, too.
as show now the power.c code is shared by a lot's of omap3 boards and as you said it's a power companion for the omap3
so 2 choices move the code to cpu/omap3 as it's omap3 specific
No and no. Above I mentioned why cpu/ is wrong (because it's board related code) and that it's not OMAP3 (SoC) specific. It's (OMAP3) *board* specific.
or to drivers/
Driver makes no sense either, because it's not a driver. Power.c *uses* drivers e.g. I2C (like the board code) to access board components.
no I2C is the communication bus, but you write a i2c drivers to manage the power chips so it's a drivers
Yes, I can do this. Unfortunately, you can't imagine how clever TI is with selling mainly the same functionality (chips) with different chip names. So most probably there is more than on chip name, and I'm not sure if I will get them right. Most probably only TI marketing department will get this right ;)
why not start with the chip name or the familly name if they can be manage by the same driver
Best Regards, J.
Dear Jean-Christophe,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
[some unanswered questions removed here?]
as davinci which is starting to be clean
Sorry, but I can't find any board/ti which would be board/<vendor> you mention above. Even not for davinci. I looked into u-boot-arm-master and -next.
and the code is start to be moved
Sorry, but this confuses me because I can't find this "start" anywhere. So for me this sounds like "I have some (undiscussed) changes in mind or in my local tree, nobody does know about, but every new patch has to care about this (publically unknown) changes" (i.e. this is 'supposed' to be used to use your wording). If this understanding is right, no, this way of dealing with patches and NACKing (?) them doesn't work. If this understanding is wrong, sorry, please correct.
But what I can find in both trees are
board/davinci/common board/davinci/dvevm board/davinci/schmoogie board/davinci/<all other Davinci boards>
This is 100% the same layout we use for OMAP3 boards. Looks fine to me.
not to me
Then, as the easiest way of dealing with directory/file moves is doing it directly in your git, the best would be if you do this re-sorting directly.
NACKing a quite trivial patch (this one) because of an existing directory/file layout you don't like, while you requested yourself this change we talk about, and making it a show stopper for adding additional boards [1] like e.g. Matthias' one, sounds somehow strange to me, btw.
[1] http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-April/051383.html
We talk about *board* specific code here, it is totally unrelated to <arch> or the <soc> we use. This board specific code configures an OMAP3 (SoC) external companion chip which is on the board (or not). Some boards which share the basic layout have this companion chip, some not. Please note that original config options (we remove with this patch) were the *board* config options (e.g. CONFIG_OMAP3_BEAGLE) to enable the compilation of power.c, too.
as show now the power.c code is shared by a lot's of omap3 boards and as you said it's a power companion for the omap3
so 2 choices move the code to cpu/omap3 as it's omap3 specific
No and no. Above I mentioned why cpu/ is wrong (because it's board related code) and that it's not OMAP3 (SoC) specific. It's (OMAP3) *board* specific.
or to drivers/
Driver makes no sense either, because it's not a driver. Power.c *uses* drivers e.g. I2C (like the board code) to access board components.
no I2C is the communication bus, but you write a i2c drivers to manage the power chips so it's a drivers
No. I don't write a driver. I just use a driver. If you want to name code that uses a driver a driver again, then you wouldn't need the board directory any more. Unfortunately, you removed my argumentation regarding this from the previous mail:
-- cut -- .... access board components. If you would move power.c to drivers, it would be similar if you would move everything in board/* to drivers.
Please have a look to code in board/davinci/common. These are no drivers, too. It's board code, which normally is in board/davinci/<board>/<board>.c file, but is moved to /common to avoid copy & paste. Same is with OMAP3 power.c code. It was originally in board/omap3/<board>/<board>.c file, but you (correctly) asked to move it to a common place to avoid copy & paste. If you like, we can move it back into <board>.c files -- cut --
Additionally, if you don't like the Davinci example, let's take an other one randomly chosen:
http://git.denx.de/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=u-boot.git;a=blob;f=board/freescale/...
Following your argumentation, for pib_init() you would need an IO expander driver. For pci_init_board() you would need a PCI driver. Both functions are larger than what we talk about here, btw. If you go on with this, you have to create a LED driver for a one liner which enables/disables a LED using a gpio driver. And at the end you will have an empty board directory.
Yes, I can do this. Unfortunately, you can't imagine how clever TI is with selling mainly the same functionality (chips) with different chip names. So most probably there is more than on chip name, and I'm not sure if I will get them right. Most probably only TI marketing department will get this right ;)
why not start with the chip name
I think I mentioned above that there are "different chip names". But anyway ...
or the familly name if they can be manage by the same driver
(no 'driver' btw)
... as mentioned above I will have a look if I can find some matching naming and send an updated patch with this.
Best regards
Dirk
On 19:41 Tue 12 May , Dirk Behme wrote:
Dear Jean-Christophe,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
[some unanswered questions removed here?]
as davinci which is starting to be clean
Sorry, but I can't find any board/ti which would be board/<vendor> you mention above. Even not for davinci. I looked into u-boot-arm-master and -next.
and the code is start to be moved
Sorry, but this confuses me because I can't find this "start" anywhere.
davinci: display correct clock info http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot/u-boot-arm.git;a=commit;h=5516e87d057c13fce05b6... davinci: move psc support board-->cpu http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot/u-boot-arm.git;a=commit;h=20bb2384e2b81e7788099...
But what I can find in both trees are
board/davinci/common board/davinci/dvevm board/davinci/schmoogie board/davinci/<all other Davinci boards>
This is 100% the same layout we use for OMAP3 boards. Looks fine to me.
not to me
Then, as the easiest way of dealing with directory/file moves is doing it directly in your git, the best would be if you do this re-sorting directly.
NACKing a quite trivial patch (this one) because of an existing directory/file layout you don't like, while you requested yourself this change we talk about, and making it a show stopper for adding additional boards [1] like e.g. Matthias' one, sounds somehow strange to me, btw.
[1] http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-April/051383.html
We talk about *board* specific code here, it is totally unrelated to <arch> or the <soc> we use. This board specific code configures an OMAP3 (SoC) external companion chip which is on the board (or not). Some boards which share the basic layout have this companion chip, some not. Please note that original config options (we remove with this patch) were the *board* config options (e.g. CONFIG_OMAP3_BEAGLE) to enable the compilation of power.c, too.
as show now the power.c code is shared by a lot's of omap3 boards and as you said it's a power companion for the omap3
so 2 choices move the code to cpu/omap3 as it's omap3 specific
No and no. Above I mentioned why cpu/ is wrong (because it's board related code) and that it's not OMAP3 (SoC) specific. It's (OMAP3) *board* specific.
or to drivers/
Driver makes no sense either, because it's not a driver. Power.c *uses* drivers e.g. I2C (like the board code) to access board components.
no I2C is the communication bus, but you write a i2c drivers to manage the power chips so it's a drivers
No. I don't write a driver. I just use a driver. If you want to name code that uses a driver a driver again, then you wouldn't need the board directory any more. Unfortunately, you removed my argumentation regarding this from the previous mail:
-- cut -- .... access board components. If you would move power.c to drivers, it would be similar if you would move everything in board/* to drivers.
Please have a look to code in board/davinci/common. These are no drivers, too.
in correct as recently the soc code as device init was move to cpu/arm926ejs/davinci
this only remaining code is the trivial dram_init and the EEProm Mac address management
If you go on with this, you have to create a LED driver for a one liner which enables/disables a LED using a gpio driver. And at the end you will have an empty board directory.
it's done for the at91 led drivers to avoid copy&paste and it's in cpu/arm926ejs/at91
Yes, I can do this. Unfortunately, you can't imagine how clever TI is with selling mainly the same functionality (chips) with different chip names. So most probably there is more than on chip name, and I'm not sure if I will get them right. Most probably only TI marketing department will get this right ;)
why not start with the chip name
I think I mentioned above that there are "different chip names". But anyway ...
I agree but to simplify it why not use at the beggening the current supported or use chip
or the familly name if they can be manage by the same driver
(no 'driver' btw)
we disagree on the term driver
is this chip is useable for other board than omap3? if yes (which I suspect correct me if I'm wrong) then it's use is not omap3 specific at all
... as mentioned above I will have a look if I can find some matching naming and send an updated patch with this.
ok
Best Regards, J.
participants (2)
-
Dirk Behme -
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD