On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 06:52:34 AM Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Merek, > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Marek Vasut <marek.va...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 12:04:22 AM Simon Glass wrote: > >> This adds a device tree pointer to the global data. It can be set by > >> board code. A later commit will add support for embedding it in U-Boot. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > >> --- > >> README | 11 +++++++++++ > >> arch/arm/include/asm/global_data.h | 1 + > >> 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > Hi, > > > > do you actually intend to introduce some kind of a driver model to uboot > > ? > > I would love to, yes. To some extent there is a bit of this already, > at least for specific subsystems. Clearly the fdt would work better if > we could just hand U-Boot the fdt and say 'init yourself'. It would > then scan the tree and init all the drivers for all active devices. > > However, we can achieve most of the aims using something along the > lines of what I have proposed, where the existing call (say to > nand_init()) can look up the fdt for its node, and then get the > information it needs. The only really difference is the explicit > hard-coded call to nand_init, rather than a general purpose routine to > find a nand node and then locate a driver for it. > > To some extent that way of doing things would invert the way U-Boot > currently works. It would also introduce questions about dealing with > multiple devices of the same type (e.g. two different i2c controllers > (not just instances) or driving two displays. These sorts of things > are tricky in U-Boot at the moment. > > So overall I think a unified driver model is a separate problem, and > one that we should discuss and perhaps move forward on separately.
Well, I have this kind of stuff in mind and I plan to try pushing it as a university project in a month or so. But (!) if you plan to init U-Boot according to FDT and I plan to add driver model, we should keep in tight contact so the driver model would be close to the FDT. And yea -- dealing with the "dirty work" like fixing subsystems etc. would be part of the driver model stuff. Cheers > > Regards. > Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot