On Mon, 22 Feb 2021 15:23:08 +0100 Köry Maincent <kory.mainc...@bootlin.com> wrote:
Hi Köry, > Thanks for your reviews. > > On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 17:29:26 +0000 > Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> wrote: > > > > > > > And then based on my comment in the previous patch, similar to > > > PINEPHONE_DT_SELECTION and other board-specific options, add a > > > CHIP_DIP_SCAN option or similar. > > > > Yes, indeed, thanks Tom. > > > > The idea of making this extension scheme generic is great, it's just > > that sunxi is using a different approach to board specific code here. > > Normally we expect U-Boot-proper board specific code to be DT driven, > > and where this does not really work, use those symbols that Tom pointed > > to. > > For my extension_board_scan board specific function, would you prefer if I > move > to callback like below instead of Kconfig? > > if (of_machine_is_compatible("nextthing,chip")) > extension_board_register_callback(chip_extension_board_scan); Well, the CHIP Pro uses a different compatible string, so you would need to check for that too. I am not fully decided if checking for the machine compatible is the right approach. The more traditional U-Boot way would be to define a config symbol (as Tom already pointed out), that would also keep the code out of other board builds. We do this already with CONFIG_PINE64_DT_SELECTION and CONFIG_PINEPHONE_DT_SELECTION. Cheers, Andre