Message ID | 20210107055041.23800-1-lokeshvutla@ti.com |
---|---|
State | Changes Requested |
Delegated to: | Tom Rini |
Headers | show |
Series | [GIT,PULL] TI changes for v2021.04 next | expand |
On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 11:20:41AM +0530, Lokesh Vutla wrote: > Hi Tom, > Please find the PR for next branch targeted for v2021.04 release. > Details about the PR are updated in the tag message. > > Gitlab build report: https://gitlab.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-ti/-/pipelines/5778 > > The following changes since commit c15f44acf9d473f4682bfdc63b8aebd313492b15: > > Prepare v2021.01-rc4 (2020-12-21 15:03:24 -0500) > > are available in the Git repository at: > > https://gitlab.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-ti.git tags/ti-v2021.04-next The PR doesn't apply cleanly now in a few cases, can you take a look at drivers/video/ti/am335x-fb.c and test/dm/test-fdt.c? > for you to fetch changes up to feff9fd0d893067bdc2e08969b5c916d10e9fc12: > > remoteproc: ti_k3_arm64: Program CNTFID0 register in GTC (2021-01-07 09:55:34 +0530) [snip] > Pali Rohár (3): > Nokia RX-51: Convert to CONFIG_DM_MMC This is also bringing up a conflict, and I think part of the real problem is that we shouldn't be having a single U_BOOT_DRVINFOS (formerly U_BOOT_DEVICES) but one per peripheral. It may work but it's not intentional (adding Simon in case he wants to correct me here). Thanks!
Hi Tom, On 07/01/21 7:41 pm, Tom Rini wrote: > On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 11:20:41AM +0530, Lokesh Vutla wrote: > >> Hi Tom, >> Please find the PR for next branch targeted for v2021.04 release. >> Details about the PR are updated in the tag message. >> >> Gitlab build report: https://gitlab.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-ti/-/pipelines/5778 >> >> The following changes since commit c15f44acf9d473f4682bfdc63b8aebd313492b15: >> >> Prepare v2021.01-rc4 (2020-12-21 15:03:24 -0500) >> >> are available in the Git repository at: >> >> https://gitlab.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-ti.git tags/ti-v2021.04-next > > The PR doesn't apply cleanly now in a few cases, can you take a look at > drivers/video/ti/am335x-fb.c and test/dm/test-fdt.c? I am based on top of rc4. Any specific base you would prefer for next branch PR? > >> for you to fetch changes up to feff9fd0d893067bdc2e08969b5c916d10e9fc12: >> >> remoteproc: ti_k3_arm64: Program CNTFID0 register in GTC (2021-01-07 09:55:34 +0530) > [snip] >> Pali Rohár (3): >> Nokia RX-51: Convert to CONFIG_DM_MMC > > This is also bringing up a conflict, and I think part of the real > problem is that we shouldn't be having a single U_BOOT_DRVINFOS > (formerly U_BOOT_DEVICES) but one per peripheral. It may work but it's > not intentional (adding Simon in case he wants to correct me here). > Thanks and regards, Lokesh > Thanks! >
On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 09:36:46AM +0530, Lokesh Vutla wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On 07/01/21 7:41 pm, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 11:20:41AM +0530, Lokesh Vutla wrote: > > > >> Hi Tom, > >> Please find the PR for next branch targeted for v2021.04 release. > >> Details about the PR are updated in the tag message. > >> > >> Gitlab build report: https://gitlab.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-ti/-/pipelines/5778 > >> > >> The following changes since commit c15f44acf9d473f4682bfdc63b8aebd313492b15: > >> > >> Prepare v2021.01-rc4 (2020-12-21 15:03:24 -0500) > >> > >> are available in the Git repository at: > >> > >> https://gitlab.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-ti.git tags/ti-v2021.04-next > > > > The PR doesn't apply cleanly now in a few cases, can you take a look at > > drivers/video/ti/am335x-fb.c and test/dm/test-fdt.c? > > I am based on top of rc4. Any specific base you would prefer for next branch PR? Current -next please.
On Thursday 07 January 2021 09:11:18 Tom Rini wrote: > > Pali Rohár (3): > > Nokia RX-51: Convert to CONFIG_DM_MMC > > This is also bringing up a conflict, and I think part of the real > problem is that we shouldn't be having a single U_BOOT_DRVINFOS > (formerly U_BOOT_DEVICES) but one per peripheral. It may work but it's > not intentional (adding Simon in case he wants to correct me here). Hello Tom! What is the one peripheral? One mmc device? Or more mmc devices with the same mmc driver? Or all mmc devices (even with different drivers)? At the time of writing this patch (2 months ago) it worked fine with U-Boot version available at that time. So I have not spotted any problem.
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 01:05:38PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > On Thursday 07 January 2021 09:11:18 Tom Rini wrote: > > > Pali Rohár (3): > > > Nokia RX-51: Convert to CONFIG_DM_MMC > > > > This is also bringing up a conflict, and I think part of the real > > problem is that we shouldn't be having a single U_BOOT_DRVINFOS > > (formerly U_BOOT_DEVICES) but one per peripheral. It may work but it's > > not intentional (adding Simon in case he wants to correct me here). > > Hello Tom! What is the one peripheral? One mmc device? Or more mmc > devices with the same mmc driver? Or all mmc devices (even with > different drivers)? The patches (as far as it looks when merging) put all of i2c and mmc in to a single U_BOOT_DRVINFOS/U_BOOT_DEVICES rather than separate i2c and mmc U_BOOT_DRVINFOS/U_BOOT_DEVICES.
On Monday 11 January 2021 07:28:08 Tom Rini wrote: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 01:05:38PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Thursday 07 January 2021 09:11:18 Tom Rini wrote: > > > > Pali Rohár (3): > > > > Nokia RX-51: Convert to CONFIG_DM_MMC > > > > > > This is also bringing up a conflict, and I think part of the real > > > problem is that we shouldn't be having a single U_BOOT_DRVINFOS > > > (formerly U_BOOT_DEVICES) but one per peripheral. It may work but it's > > > not intentional (adding Simon in case he wants to correct me here). > > > > Hello Tom! What is the one peripheral? One mmc device? Or more mmc > > devices with the same mmc driver? Or all mmc devices (even with > > different drivers)? > > The patches (as far as it looks when merging) put all of i2c and mmc in > to a single U_BOOT_DRVINFOS/U_BOOT_DEVICES rather than separate i2c and > mmc U_BOOT_DRVINFOS/U_BOOT_DEVICES. Ok, so you want to put all mmc devices into the one U_BOOT_DRVINFOS and all i2c devices into second U_BOOT_DRVINFOS?
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 01:31:54PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > On Monday 11 January 2021 07:28:08 Tom Rini wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 01:05:38PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > On Thursday 07 January 2021 09:11:18 Tom Rini wrote: > > > > > Pali Rohár (3): > > > > > Nokia RX-51: Convert to CONFIG_DM_MMC > > > > > > > > This is also bringing up a conflict, and I think part of the real > > > > problem is that we shouldn't be having a single U_BOOT_DRVINFOS > > > > (formerly U_BOOT_DEVICES) but one per peripheral. It may work but it's > > > > not intentional (adding Simon in case he wants to correct me here). > > > > > > Hello Tom! What is the one peripheral? One mmc device? Or more mmc > > > devices with the same mmc driver? Or all mmc devices (even with > > > different drivers)? > > > > The patches (as far as it looks when merging) put all of i2c and mmc in > > to a single U_BOOT_DRVINFOS/U_BOOT_DEVICES rather than separate i2c and > > mmc U_BOOT_DRVINFOS/U_BOOT_DEVICES. > > Ok, so you want to put all mmc devices into the one U_BOOT_DRVINFOS and > all i2c devices into second U_BOOT_DRVINFOS? Yes, that's how it's usually done.
On Monday 11 January 2021 07:34:11 Tom Rini wrote: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 01:31:54PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Monday 11 January 2021 07:28:08 Tom Rini wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 01:05:38PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > On Thursday 07 January 2021 09:11:18 Tom Rini wrote: > > > > > > Pali Rohár (3): > > > > > > Nokia RX-51: Convert to CONFIG_DM_MMC > > > > > > > > > > This is also bringing up a conflict, and I think part of the real > > > > > problem is that we shouldn't be having a single U_BOOT_DRVINFOS > > > > > (formerly U_BOOT_DEVICES) but one per peripheral. It may work but it's > > > > > not intentional (adding Simon in case he wants to correct me here). > > > > > > > > Hello Tom! What is the one peripheral? One mmc device? Or more mmc > > > > devices with the same mmc driver? Or all mmc devices (even with > > > > different drivers)? > > > > > > The patches (as far as it looks when merging) put all of i2c and mmc in > > > to a single U_BOOT_DRVINFOS/U_BOOT_DEVICES rather than separate i2c and > > > mmc U_BOOT_DRVINFOS/U_BOOT_DEVICES. > > > > Ok, so you want to put all mmc devices into the one U_BOOT_DRVINFOS and > > all i2c devices into second U_BOOT_DRVINFOS? > > Yes, that's how it's usually done. Ok! Fixed in V2.