[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 0/2] sunxi: update Pine64 device tree
Hi, an updated version: the first patch is unchanged (still the exact same DT as in Linux), but the second patch reformats the Ethernet nodes as a .dtsi and uses the new U-Boot specific DT addon feature to make it clear that these nodes are for a (preliminary) U-Boot specific binding. Once the Ethernet driver made it into Linux, we will either adapt the U-Boot driver to cope with the new binding or get a new (Designware based) driver anyway. In any case this -u-boot.dtsi can then just be removed. == When the Pine64 support was merged into U-Boot, there was no official Pine64 .dts in the Linux tree. Since this has changed now and the meanwhile merged Linux DT differs quite a lot from the (preliminary) .dts we used in U-Boot so far, let's update U-Boot's DT to match the Linux version. Beside the effect of using a single instance of the DT we gain the huge advantage of not (necessarily) needing to load a .dtb to boot Linux. Instead just specifying $fdtcontroladdr does the trick, which is used by the UEFI boot scheme already. This has the potential of relieving distributions from the burden of supplying .dtb files for each and every "supported" board. Following Chen-Yu's suggestion on the last post, the first patch is a 1:1 copy of the Linux version (as of 4.12-rc1), the second one (re-)adds the DT nodes for the Ethernet MAC, which is both not-yet-upstream in Linux and also differening from the proposed Linux driver bindings. But let's fix that later once the Linux driver gets merged. Given that U-Boot itself does not use the DT much (at least at the moment), there is little risk of breakage, so I'd be grateful if this could be still merged into the next release. Cheers, Andre. Andre Przywara (2): sunxi: A64/Pine64: update device tree from Linux sunxi: A64/Pine64: (re-)add sun8i emac DT nodes arch/arm/dts/sun50i-a64-pine64-plus-u-boot.dtsi| 50 ++ arch/arm/dts/sun50i-a64-pine64-plus.dts| 26 +- arch/arm/dts/sun50i-a64-pine64.dts | 59 +- arch/arm/dts/sun50i-a64.dtsi | 639 ++--- include/dt-bindings/clock/sun50i-a64-ccu.h | 134 + .../dt-bindings/reset/sun50i-a64-ccu.h | 109 ++-- 6 files changed, 489 insertions(+), 528 deletions(-) create mode 100644 arch/arm/dts/sun50i-a64-pine64-plus-u-boot.dtsi create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/clock/sun50i-a64-ccu.h rename arch/arm/dts/sun50i-a64-pine64-common.dtsi => include/dt-bindings/reset/sun50i-a64-ccu.h (52%) -- 2.9.0 ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 0/2] sunxi: update Pine64 device tree
Hi Andre, Am 23.05.2017 um 12:09 schrieb Andre Przywara: > an updated version: the first patch is unchanged (still the exact > same DT as in Linux), but the second patch reformats the Ethernet nodes > as a .dtsi and uses the new U-Boot specific DT addon feature to make > it clear that these nodes are for a (preliminary) U-Boot specific binding. > Once the Ethernet driver made it into Linux, we will either adapt the > U-Boot driver to cope with the new binding or get a new (Designware based) > driver anyway. In any case this -u-boot.dtsi can then just be removed. Could we squash the two? Or add the .dtsi first? That would keep the series bisectable. Cheers, Andreas -- SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 0/2] sunxi: update Pine64 device tree
Hi, On 23/05/17 23:26, Andreas Färber wrote: > Hi Andre, > > Am 23.05.2017 um 12:09 schrieb Andre Przywara: >> an updated version: the first patch is unchanged (still the exact >> same DT as in Linux), but the second patch reformats the Ethernet nodes >> as a .dtsi and uses the new U-Boot specific DT addon feature to make >> it clear that these nodes are for a (preliminary) U-Boot specific binding. >> Once the Ethernet driver made it into Linux, we will either adapt the >> U-Boot driver to cope with the new binding or get a new (Designware based) >> driver anyway. In any case this -u-boot.dtsi can then just be removed. > > Could we squash the two? Or add the .dtsi first? That would keep the > series bisectable. Yeah, now with that separate file for the Ethernet node squashing the two patches into one would be the easiest. Chen-Yu, Maxime, are you OK with this? I can send a new version then. Cheers, Andre. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 0/2] sunxi: update Pine64 device tree
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 09:30:05AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: > Hi, > > On 23/05/17 23:26, Andreas Färber wrote: > > Hi Andre, > > > > Am 23.05.2017 um 12:09 schrieb Andre Przywara: > >> an updated version: the first patch is unchanged (still the exact > >> same DT as in Linux), but the second patch reformats the Ethernet nodes > >> as a .dtsi and uses the new U-Boot specific DT addon feature to make > >> it clear that these nodes are for a (preliminary) U-Boot specific binding. > >> Once the Ethernet driver made it into Linux, we will either adapt the > >> U-Boot driver to cope with the new binding or get a new (Designware based) > >> driver anyway. In any case this -u-boot.dtsi can then just be removed. > > > > Could we squash the two? Or add the .dtsi first? That would keep the > > series bisectable. > > Yeah, now with that separate file for the Ethernet node squashing the > two patches into one would be the easiest. > > Chen-Yu, Maxime, are you OK with this? I can send a new version then. Yep, that works for me. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 0/2] sunxi: update Pine64 device tree
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 4:30 PM, Andre Przywara wrote: > Hi, > > On 23/05/17 23:26, Andreas Färber wrote: >> Hi Andre, >> >> Am 23.05.2017 um 12:09 schrieb Andre Przywara: >>> an updated version: the first patch is unchanged (still the exact >>> same DT as in Linux), but the second patch reformats the Ethernet nodes >>> as a .dtsi and uses the new U-Boot specific DT addon feature to make >>> it clear that these nodes are for a (preliminary) U-Boot specific binding. >>> Once the Ethernet driver made it into Linux, we will either adapt the >>> U-Boot driver to cope with the new binding or get a new (Designware based) >>> driver anyway. In any case this -u-boot.dtsi can then just be removed. >> >> Could we squash the two? Or add the .dtsi first? That would keep the >> series bisectable. > > Yeah, now with that separate file for the Ethernet node squashing the > two patches into one would be the easiest. > > Chen-Yu, Maxime, are you OK with this? I can send a new version then. You're asking the wrong person. I'm not a maintainer for U-boot. :p Andreas' point is valid. Keeping it in one patch means the user retains ethernet support across the changes. ChenYu ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 0/2] sunxi: update Pine64 device tree
Hi, On 24/05/17 10:14, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 4:30 PM, Andre Przywara > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 23/05/17 23:26, Andreas Färber wrote: >>> Hi Andre, >>> >>> Am 23.05.2017 um 12:09 schrieb Andre Przywara: an updated version: the first patch is unchanged (still the exact same DT as in Linux), but the second patch reformats the Ethernet nodes as a .dtsi and uses the new U-Boot specific DT addon feature to make it clear that these nodes are for a (preliminary) U-Boot specific binding. Once the Ethernet driver made it into Linux, we will either adapt the U-Boot driver to cope with the new binding or get a new (Designware based) driver anyway. In any case this -u-boot.dtsi can then just be removed. >>> >>> Could we squash the two? Or add the .dtsi first? That would keep the >>> series bisectable. >> >> Yeah, now with that separate file for the Ethernet node squashing the >> two patches into one would be the easiest. >> >> Chen-Yu, Maxime, are you OK with this? I can send a new version then. > > You're asking the wrong person. I'm not a maintainer for U-boot. :p I know, but you commented on my initial post a few weeks ago (suggesting to keep the DT update in one patch) and are a valuable and knowledgeable resource anyway ;-) Cheers, Andre. > Andreas' point is valid. Keeping it in one patch means the user retains > ethernet support across the changes. > > ChenYu > ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
