From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Allen Martin Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Add Tegra132 support for the cbootimage utility Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 15:36:59 -0700 Message-ID: <20140714223659.GA13652@nvidia.com> References: <1404987710-26375-1-git-send-email-vinceh@nvidia.com> <1404987710-26375-2-git-send-email-vinceh@nvidia.com> <20140711182317.GA1730@nvidia.com> <53C44402.8020803@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <53C44402.8020803-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Vince Hsu Cc: "swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org" , "linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 01:56:34PM -0700, Vince Hsu wrote: > Hi, > > On 07/12/2014 02:23 AM, Allen Martin wrote: > >> >+cbootimage_soc_config tegra132_config = { > >> >+ .init_bad_block_table = t132_init_bad_block_table, > >> >+ .set_dev_param = t132_set_dev_param, > >> >+ .get_dev_param = t132_get_dev_param, > >> >+ .set_sdram_param = t132_set_sdram_param, > >> >+ .get_sdram_param = t132_get_sdram_param, > >> >+ .setbl_param = t132_setbl_param, > >> >+ .getbl_param = t132_getbl_param, > >> >+ .set_value = t132_bct_set_value, > >> >+ .get_value = t132_bct_get_value, > >> >+ .set_data = t132_bct_set_data, > >> >+ .get_bct_size = t132_get_bct_size, > >> >+ .set_mts_info = t132_set_mts_info, > >> >+ .get_mts_info = t132_get_mts_info, > >> >+ .token_supported = t132_bct_token_supported, > >> >+ > >> >+ .devtype_table = s_devtype_table_t132, > >> >+ .sdmmc_data_width_table = s_sdmmc_data_width_table_t132, > >> >+ .spi_clock_source_table = s_spi_clock_source_table_t132, > >> >+ .nvboot_memory_type_table = s_nvboot_memory_type_table_t132, > >> >+ .sdram_field_table = s_sdram_field_table_t132, > >> >+ .nand_table = 0, > >> >+ .sdmmc_table = s_sdmmc_table_t132, > >> >+ .spiflash_table = s_spiflash_table_t132, > >> >+ .device_type_table = s_device_type_table_t132, > >> >+}; > >> >+ > > Since Tegra132 and Tegra124 are so similar, can we reuse the Tegra124 > > version of any of these to avoid the duplication? > Some of these functions like setbl_param refer to the macros/definitions > in nvboot_bct_txx.h. So maybe they look similar, actually they don't. If > we want to generalize these functions, we might have to refactor > nvboot_bct_txx.h and some more stuff. Can we leave it as is? I can see how this could turn into a can of worms. I just seems like a shame to have to duplicate so much code for a new SoC that's ~90% the same as the previous SoC. Can the token tables be reused, or do they have the same issue? -Allen