Hi Pantelis, On 02/19/2015 01:44 PM, Pantelis Antoniou wrote: > Hi Tony, > >> On Feb 19, 2015, at 20:36 , Tony Lindgren <t...@atomide.com> wrote: >> >> * Pantelis Antoniou <pa...@antoniou-consulting.com> [150219 10:32]: >>>> On Feb 19, 2015, at 20:16 , Tony Lindgren <t...@atomide.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Uhh I don't like the idea of duplicating the i2c-omap.c driver under >>>> arch/arm.. And in general we should initialize things later rather >>>> than earlier. >>>> >>>> What's stopping doing these quirk checks later on time with just >>>> a regular device driver, something like drivers/misc/bbone-quirks.c? >>>> >>> >>> We have no choice; we are way early in the boot process, right after >>> the device tree unflattening step. >> >> To me it seems the dt patching part should be done with minimal >> code before any driver like features.. >> > > The way it’s done right now is with minimal code. Reading the EEPROM > is required. > >>> I’ve toyed with the idea of using early platform devices but the omap-i2c >>> driver >>> would need some tender love and care to make it work, and I didn’t want to >>> get >>> bogged down with i2c driver details at this point. >> >> ..so how about just parse a kernel cmdline for the quirks to apply >> based on a version string or similar? That can be easily populated >> by u-boot or set manually with setenv. >> >> That leaves out the need for tinkering with i2c super early in >> the kernel for revision detection. >> > > You assume there’s going to be a bootloader…
So does this patch. > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/am33xx-dt-quirks.c > b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/am33xx-dt-quirks.c [...] > + * Note that we rely on the bootloader setting up the muxes > + * (which is the case for u-boot). Regards, Peter Hurley -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
