On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 11:58:50AM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote: > > > On 2022/2/3 2:42, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 02:45:44PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote: > > > Hi Marcel, > > > > > > [Adding Tom and Marek] > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 2:40 PM Marcel Ziswiler > > > <marcel.ziswi...@toradex.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > The blocker to getting non-dm-spl-usb support for IMX8M appears to be > > > > > the base addresses and instead of adding more of them to imx-regs.h we > > > > > need to get them from DT via of_platdata which nobody has had time to > > > > > dig into yet. > > > > > > > > I was also a little hesitant due to not using DM in SPL might no longer > > > > be accepted upstream. What is the > > > > stance on this? > > > > > > My understanding is that there is no requirement to use DM in SPL. > > > > DM isn't required in SPL, no. Are we running in to some size limit > > here? I see SPL_DM being set in a number of imx8m* platforms is why I > > ask. > > I still see this as maintainence effort. And mix DM & non-DM code in one > driver is pain. Should we split non-DM code out to a new folder, such as > drivers/non-dm/[usb,mmc,...]/
No, I don't think splitting it in to a new root subfolder will help at least in part because I'm not sure it will go away long term, but we'll see where some of the platdata work leads. Splitting the existing files more may make the code easier to maintain and would have to be done to move to a new root subfolder as well? -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
