On 02/13/2017 06:23 PM, Kever Yang wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On 01/16/2017 12:15 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi Kever,
>>
>> On 15 January 2017 at 18:28, Kever Yang <kever.y...@rock-chips.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Simon,
>>>
>>> I met two issue when using of-platdata
>>>
>>> 1. compitable name with '.'
>>> I get compile error as below:
>>> In file included from include/dt-structs.h:16:0,
>>> from spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:3:
>>> include/generated/dt-structs.h:26:35: error: expected identifier or ‘(’
>>> before numeric constant
>>> struct dtd_rockchip_rk3399_sdhci_5.1 {
>>> ^
>>> spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:41:42: error: expected identifier or ‘(’ before
>>> numeric constant
>>> static struct dtd_rockchip_rk3399_sdhci_5.1 dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000 = {
>>> ^
>>> spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:55:15: error: ‘dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000’ undeclared here
>>> (not in a function)
>>> .platdata = &dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000,
>>> ^
>>> make[2]: *** [spl/dts/dt-platdata.o] Error 1
>>> make[1]: *** [spl/u-boot-spl] Error 2
>>> make: *** [__build_one_by_one] Error 2
>>>
>>> The dts node starts like this:
>>> sdhci: sdhci@fe330000 {
>>> u-boot,dm-pre-reloc;
>>> compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-sdhci-5.1",
>>> "arasan,sdhci-5.1";
>>> ...
>> That just involves replacing '.' with '_'. I sent a patch.
>>
>>> 2. multi compatible name
>>> When a dts node have more than one compatible name, which is prefer to use?
>>> for example, we have two dwmmc compatible name in rk3399, the tool is using
>>> the first one,
>>> while the source code using the last one.
>>>
>>> "drivers/mmc/rockchip_dw_mmc.c"
>>> 23 struct rockchip_mmc_plat {
>>> 24 #if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_PLATDATA)
>>> 25 struct dtd_rockchip_rk3288_dw_mshc dtplat;
>>> 26 #endif
>>> 27 struct mmc_config cfg;
>>> 28 struct mmc mmc;
>>> 29 };
>>> ...
>>> dts node
>>> sdmmc: dwmmc@fe320000 {
>>> compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-dw-mshc",
>>> "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc";
>> I'm not sure of the best solution here (other than putting more
>> on-chip SRAM in your devices hint hint :-)
>>
>> One option is something like:
>>
>> struct rockchip_mmc_plat {
>> #if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_PLATDATA)
>> #ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
>> struct dtd_rockchip_rk3288_dw_mshc dtplat;
>> #elif defined(CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK399)
>> struct dtd_rockchip_rk399_dw_mshc dtplat;
>> #endif
>> #endif
>>
>> Obviously we don't want that as it is putting SoC-specific stuff in the
>> driver.
>>
>> IMO the compatible strings are being misused a bit. Can there not be a
>> compatible string which is common to all rockchip devices which use
>> this IP? Something like "rockchip,dw-mshc-v1"? Then you can avoid
>> adding a new compatible string every time you use the same IP in a
>> device.
>
> Agree, but... this is from kernel, we can't control it unless all kernel
> maintainers
> have the same idea.
does it use just "rockchip,dw-mshc"? Maybe this can be common compatible for
rockchip.
If it needs add the other compatible in future, it should be added the specific
compatible at that time.
>>
>> Another option would be for dtoc to #define each compatible string to
>> the first one. If you think that would work, I could do a patch.
>
> I think we can try with the first one in the driver for of-platdata,
> this would have problem for the first compatible name is different but
> they share the same driver, like syscon. For syscon, you have resolved with
> a special dirver, not sure if other driver has the same problem.
>
> Could you help to make a patch for this solution?
>
> Thanks,
> - Kever
>>
>> Regards,
>> Simon
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> U-Boot mailing list
> U-Boot@lists.denx.de
> http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
