On 4/21/20 7:36 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Patrice, > > On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 at 08:09, Patrice Chotard <patrice.chot...@st.com> wrote: >> Initial implementation invokes device_bind_with_driver_data() >> with driver_data parameter equal to 0. >> For driver with driver data, the bind command can't bind >> correctly this driver or even worse causes data abort. >> >> Add find_udevice_id() to parse the driver's of_match list >> and return the entry corresponding to the driver compatible string. >> This allows to get access to driver_data and to use it as >> parameters of device_bind_with_driver_data(). >> >> Signed-off-by: Patrice Chotard <patrice.chot...@st.com> >> Cc: Jean-Jacques Hiblot <jjhib...@ti.com> >> >> --- >> >> cmd/bind.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> > The thing I don't quite get here is why the driver name needs to be > specified. If the device tree node is present, and it has a compatible
Sorry, i didn't get your point when you said "why the driver name needs to be specified" Which part of this patch do you made reference to ? > string, can't DM find the driver and bind a device automatically? > > Also, is there any docs for this command? It would be good to add to Is what in cmd/bind.c not enough ? U_BOOT_CMD( bind, 4, 0, do_bind_unbind, "Bind a device to a driver", "<node path> <driver>\n" "bind <class> <index> <driver>\n" ); U_BOOT_CMD( unbind, 4, 0, do_bind_unbind, "Unbind a device from a driver", "<node path>\n" "unbind <class> <index>\n" "unbind <class> <index> <driver>\n" ); > doc/driver-model and also add a simple test. Ok i will add an additionnal test to test/py/tests/test_bind.py Thanks Patrice > > Regards, > Simon