Message ID | 1544190655-4405-1-git-send-email-jjhiblot@ti.com |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | DM_I2C_COMPAT removal for all ti platforms | expand |
On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 02:50:36PM +0100, Jean-Jacques Hiblot wrote: > This series remove the usage of the DM_I2C_COMPAT option for all the ti > platforms. It also takes this opportunity to not disable DM_I2C in the SPL. > > There are a couples of issues to fix: > - CMD_EEPROM does not support the DM API. Fixed by removing this option > when DM_I2C is used without DM_I2C_COMPAT > - i2c_get_chip_for_busnum() does not work when OF_CONTROL is not used > (as is the case with am33xx SPL). > - The I2C driver do not support DM_I2C without OF_CONTROL. > - Most of the PMIC drivers do not support the I2C DM API. > - Board detection is done prior DM initialization. Fixed by moving it after > DM is initialized. That move breaks the DRA7 platforms (The fixes for > that are at the last 5 patches this series) > > When all this is taken care of DM_I2C_COMPAT can be removed and DM_I2C > enabled in the SPL. > > This has been tested with the following boards: > - am437x SK > - am335x SK > - am335x beaglebone (both DM and non-DM config) > - dra76 evm > - am572 evm > - k2g evm > > The following targets may be impacted by the changes related to > SPL_OF_CONTROL and SPL_OF_PLATDATA: > - am3517_evm_defconfig > - omap3_logic_defconfig > - chromebit_mickey_defconfig > - chromebook_jerry_defconfig > - chromebook_minnie_defconfig > - evb-rk3399_defconfig > - rock_defconfig > > It would be nice it some of you could try to boot them. So I've just reviewed-by all of the TI parts. Heiko, do you want this via the I2C tree? Simon, do you want this via the DM tree? Do both of you just want me to grab it instead? The window on applying this for this release is closing quickly but this has been around for long enough that I'd like to see it go in. Thanks!
Hi Tom, On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 at 07:23, Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 02:50:36PM +0100, Jean-Jacques Hiblot wrote: > > > This series remove the usage of the DM_I2C_COMPAT option for all the ti > > platforms. It also takes this opportunity to not disable DM_I2C in the SPL. > > > > There are a couples of issues to fix: > > - CMD_EEPROM does not support the DM API. Fixed by removing this option > > when DM_I2C is used without DM_I2C_COMPAT > > - i2c_get_chip_for_busnum() does not work when OF_CONTROL is not used > > (as is the case with am33xx SPL). > > - The I2C driver do not support DM_I2C without OF_CONTROL. > > - Most of the PMIC drivers do not support the I2C DM API. > > - Board detection is done prior DM initialization. Fixed by moving it after > > DM is initialized. That move breaks the DRA7 platforms (The fixes for > > that are at the last 5 patches this series) > > > > When all this is taken care of DM_I2C_COMPAT can be removed and DM_I2C > > enabled in the SPL. > > > > This has been tested with the following boards: > > - am437x SK > > - am335x SK > > - am335x beaglebone (both DM and non-DM config) > > - dra76 evm > > - am572 evm > > - k2g evm > > > > The following targets may be impacted by the changes related to > > SPL_OF_CONTROL and SPL_OF_PLATDATA: > > - am3517_evm_defconfig > > - omap3_logic_defconfig > > - chromebit_mickey_defconfig > > - chromebook_jerry_defconfig > > - chromebook_minnie_defconfig > > - evb-rk3399_defconfig > > - rock_defconfig > > > > It would be nice it some of you could try to boot them. > > So I've just reviewed-by all of the TI parts. Heiko, do you want this > via the I2C tree? Simon, do you want this via the DM tree? Do both of > you just want me to grab it instead? The window on applying this for > this release is closing quickly but this has been around for long enough > that I'd like to see it go in. Thanks! Agreed. I am happy to take it, or you can. Please let me know. Regards, Simon
Hello Simon, Am 11.12.2018 um 02:05 schrieb Simon Glass: > Hi Tom, > > On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 at 07:23, Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 02:50:36PM +0100, Jean-Jacques Hiblot wrote: >> >>> This series remove the usage of the DM_I2C_COMPAT option for all the ti >>> platforms. It also takes this opportunity to not disable DM_I2C in the SPL. >>> >>> There are a couples of issues to fix: >>> - CMD_EEPROM does not support the DM API. Fixed by removing this option >>> when DM_I2C is used without DM_I2C_COMPAT >>> - i2c_get_chip_for_busnum() does not work when OF_CONTROL is not used >>> (as is the case with am33xx SPL). >>> - The I2C driver do not support DM_I2C without OF_CONTROL. >>> - Most of the PMIC drivers do not support the I2C DM API. >>> - Board detection is done prior DM initialization. Fixed by moving it after >>> DM is initialized. That move breaks the DRA7 platforms (The fixes for >>> that are at the last 5 patches this series) >>> >>> When all this is taken care of DM_I2C_COMPAT can be removed and DM_I2C >>> enabled in the SPL. >>> >>> This has been tested with the following boards: >>> - am437x SK >>> - am335x SK >>> - am335x beaglebone (both DM and non-DM config) >>> - dra76 evm >>> - am572 evm >>> - k2g evm >>> >>> The following targets may be impacted by the changes related to >>> SPL_OF_CONTROL and SPL_OF_PLATDATA: >>> - am3517_evm_defconfig >>> - omap3_logic_defconfig >>> - chromebit_mickey_defconfig >>> - chromebook_jerry_defconfig >>> - chromebook_minnie_defconfig >>> - evb-rk3399_defconfig >>> - rock_defconfig >>> >>> It would be nice it some of you could try to boot them. >> >> So I've just reviewed-by all of the TI parts. Heiko, do you want this >> via the I2C tree? Simon, do you want this via the DM tree? Do both of >> you just want me to grab it instead? The window on applying this for >> this release is closing quickly but this has been around for long enough >> that I'd like to see it go in. Thanks! > > Agreed. I am happy to take it, or you can. Please let me know. I just tooked them and send a pull request to Tom, see: https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2018-December/351388.html and Tom apllied it already: https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2018-December/351431.html Stephen found a regression, see: https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2018-December/351480.html I am not in front of my PC today, so I have to look, may Jean-Jacques has time to look into? bye, Heiko