On 04/09/2014 06:40 PM, Tim Harvey wrote:
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 7:56 AM, Nikita Kiryanov <nik...@compulab.co.il> wrote:
Hi Tim,
On 04/03/2014 09:01 AM, Tim Harvey wrote:
Add new function that can take an array of iomux configs, an index, and
a stride to allow a multi-dimentional array of pinmux values to be used
to define pinmux values per cpu-type.
This takes a different approach to previously proposed solutions which
used
multiple arrays of pad lists. The goal is to eliminate having these
multiple
arrays such as 'mx6q_uart1_pads' and 'mx6dl_uart1_pads' which are almost
identical copies of each other except for the MX6Q/MX6DL prefix on the
PAD.
I like this approach, but I think you should also define the IOMUX,
SETUP_PAD, and SETUP_PADS macros from patch 10 in this file, as they
(macros and function) are clearly meant to be used together.
I agree with this. Do the macro names IOMUX, SETUP_PAD, SETUP_PADS make sense?
My suggestion would be MX6QDL_DDR_IOMUX, MX6QDL_DDR_SETUP_PADS, and
MX6QDL_SETUP_PAD (this last one is not DDR specific).
--
Regards,
Nikita.
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
