[U-Boot] [PATCH v7 3/7] ARM: socfpga: Add FPGA drivers for Arria 10 FPGA bitstream loading

[Chee, Tien Fong <tien.fong.chee@intel.com>]

On Fri, 2019-02-01 at 09:29 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 2/1/19 5:04 AM, Chee, Tien Fong wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, 2019-01-31 at 15:55 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > 
> > > On 1/31/19 3:51 PM, tien.fong.chee at intel.com wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > From: Tien Fong Chee <tien.fong.chee@intel.com>
> > > > 
> > > > Add FPGA driver to support program FPGA with FPGA bitstream
> > > > loading
> > > > from
> > > > filesystem. The driver are designed based on generic firmware
> > > > loader
> > > > framework. The driver can handle FPGA program operation from
> > > > loading FPGA
> > > > bitstream in flash to memory and then to program FPGA.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Tien Fong Chee <tien.fong.chee@intel.com>
> > > > 
> > > > ---
> > > > 
> > > > changes for v7
> > > > - Restructure the FPGA driver to support both peripheral
> > > > bitstream
> > > > and core
> > > >   bitstream bundled into FIT image.
> > > > - Support loadable property for core bitstream. User can set
> > > > loadable
> > > >   in DDR for better performance. This loading would be done in
> > > > one
> > > > large
> > > >   chunk instead of chunk by chunk loading with small memory
> > > > buffer.
> > > > ---
> > > >  arch/arm/dts/socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc.dts       |  18 +
> > > >  .../include/mach/fpga_manager_arria10.h            |  39 +-
> > > >  drivers/fpga/socfpga_arria10.c                     | 417
> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > >  3 files changed, 457 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc.dts
> > > > b/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc.dts
> > > > index 998d811..dc55618 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc.dts
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc.dts
> > > > @@ -18,6 +18,24 @@
> > > >  /dts-v1/;
> > > >  #include "socfpga_arria10_socdk.dtsi"
> > > >  
> > > > +/ {
> > > > +	chosen {
> > > > +		firmware-loader = &fs_loader0;
> > > Shouldn't this be <&fs_loader0>; ?
> > > How did this even pass the DTC ?
> > So <> is compulsory required for phandle? No error complaint from
> > DTC.
> Yes
I just checked the codes, this &fs_loader0 without <> is valid, because
this is not a phandle, instead it is a label which will be expanded to
the node's full path.
>