* [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/5] configs: mx6ul: Update comment in license notes
2016-09-03 8:22 [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/5] imx: mx6ul: Refactor common code as mx6ul Jagan Teki
@ 2016-09-03 8:22 ` Jagan Teki
2016-09-03 8:22 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/5] spi: Kconfig: Move FSL_QSPI entry to non-dm place Jagan Teki
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jagan Teki @ 2016-09-03 8:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Since mx6ul.h is common to all mx6ul board configs, so
update the comment in license notes as i.MX6UL SOC config.
Cc: Stefano Babic <sbabic@denx.de>
Cc: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
Cc: Michael Trimarchi <michael@amarulasolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@amarulasolutions.com>
---
include/configs/mx6ul.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/configs/mx6ul.h b/include/configs/mx6ul.h
index b2ba773..77707c9 100644
--- a/include/configs/mx6ul.h
+++ b/include/configs/mx6ul.h
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
/*
* Copyright (C) 2015 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.
*
- * Configuration settings for the Freescale i.MX6UL 14x14 EVK board.
+ * Configuration settings for the NXP i.MX6UL SOC.
*
* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
*/
--
2.7.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/5] spi: Kconfig: Move FSL_QSPI entry to non-dm place
2016-09-03 8:22 [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/5] imx: mx6ul: Refactor common code as mx6ul Jagan Teki
2016-09-03 8:22 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/5] configs: mx6ul: Update comment in license notes Jagan Teki
@ 2016-09-03 8:22 ` Jagan Teki
2016-09-03 8:22 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 4/5] configs: mx6ul: Move SPI/SPI-FLASH configs to defconfig Jagan Teki
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jagan Teki @ 2016-09-03 8:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Since FSL_QSPI driver still supporting non-dm code
better to move the Kconfig from DM undefined place.
Cc: Stefano Babic <sbabic@denx.de>
Cc: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
Cc: Michael Trimarchi <michael@amarulasolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@amarulasolutions.com>
---
drivers/spi/Kconfig | 14 +++++++-------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/spi/Kconfig b/drivers/spi/Kconfig
index aca385d..5da66a6 100644
--- a/drivers/spi/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/spi/Kconfig
@@ -61,13 +61,6 @@ config FSL_DSPI
this Freescale DSPI IP core. LS102xA and Colibri VF50/VF61 platforms
use this driver.
-config FSL_QSPI
- bool "Freescale QSPI driver"
- help
- Enable the Freescale Quad-SPI (QSPI) driver. This driver can be
- used to access the SPI NOR flash on platforms embedding this
- Freescale IP core.
-
config ICH_SPI
bool "Intel ICH SPI driver"
help
@@ -188,6 +181,13 @@ config FSL_ESPI
access the SPI interface and SPI NOR flash on platforms embedding
this Freescale eSPI IP core.
+config FSL_QSPI
+ bool "Freescale QSPI driver"
+ help
+ Enable the Freescale Quad-SPI (QSPI) driver. This driver can be
+ used to access the SPI NOR flash on platforms embedding this
+ Freescale IP core.
+
config TI_QSPI
bool "TI QSPI driver"
help
--
2.7.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* [U-Boot] [PATCH 4/5] configs: mx6ul: Move SPI/SPI-FLASH configs to defconfig
2016-09-03 8:22 [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/5] imx: mx6ul: Refactor common code as mx6ul Jagan Teki
2016-09-03 8:22 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/5] configs: mx6ul: Update comment in license notes Jagan Teki
2016-09-03 8:22 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/5] spi: Kconfig: Move FSL_QSPI entry to non-dm place Jagan Teki
@ 2016-09-03 8:22 ` Jagan Teki
2016-09-03 8:22 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL Jagan Teki
2016-09-04 2:27 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/5] imx: mx6ul: Refactor common code as mx6ul Fabio Estevam
4 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jagan Teki @ 2016-09-03 8:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Moved SPI/SPI-FLASH configs from mx6ul.h into respective
used defconfigs.
- CONFIG_FSL_QSPI
- CONFIG_SPI_FLASH
- CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_BAR
- CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_STMICRO
Cc: Stefano Babic <sbabic@denx.de>
Cc: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
Cc: Michael Trimarchi <michael@amarulasolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@amarulasolutions.com>
---
configs/mx6ul_14x14_evk_defconfig | 4 ++++
configs/mx6ul_9x9_evk_defconfig | 4 ++++
include/configs/mx6ul.h | 4 ----
3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/configs/mx6ul_14x14_evk_defconfig b/configs/mx6ul_14x14_evk_defconfig
index c65bdbf..4c9e19a 100644
--- a/configs/mx6ul_14x14_evk_defconfig
+++ b/configs/mx6ul_14x14_evk_defconfig
@@ -22,3 +22,7 @@ CONFIG_CMD_EXT4_WRITE=y
CONFIG_CMD_FAT=y
CONFIG_CMD_FS_GENERIC=y
CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT=y
+CONFIG_FSL_QSPI=y
+CONFIG_SPI_FLASH=y
+CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_BAR=y
+CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_STMICRO=y
diff --git a/configs/mx6ul_9x9_evk_defconfig b/configs/mx6ul_9x9_evk_defconfig
index caf2477..da1997b 100644
--- a/configs/mx6ul_9x9_evk_defconfig
+++ b/configs/mx6ul_9x9_evk_defconfig
@@ -22,3 +22,7 @@ CONFIG_CMD_EXT4_WRITE=y
CONFIG_CMD_FAT=y
CONFIG_CMD_FS_GENERIC=y
CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT=y
+CONFIG_FSL_QSPI=y
+CONFIG_SPI_FLASH=y
+CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_BAR=y
+CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_STMICRO=y
diff --git a/include/configs/mx6ul.h b/include/configs/mx6ul.h
index 77707c9..f5bdb40 100644
--- a/include/configs/mx6ul.h
+++ b/include/configs/mx6ul.h
@@ -188,15 +188,11 @@
#ifndef CONFIG_SYS_DCACHE_OFF
#endif
-#define CONFIG_FSL_QSPI
#ifdef CONFIG_FSL_QSPI
-#define CONFIG_SPI_FLASH
-#define CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_BAR
#define CONFIG_SF_DEFAULT_BUS 0
#define CONFIG_SF_DEFAULT_CS 0
#define CONFIG_SF_DEFAULT_SPEED 40000000
#define CONFIG_SF_DEFAULT_MODE SPI_MODE_0
-#define CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_STMICRO
#define FSL_QSPI_FLASH_NUM 1
#define FSL_QSPI_FLASH_SIZE SZ_32M
#endif
--
2.7.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL
2016-09-03 8:22 [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/5] imx: mx6ul: Refactor common code as mx6ul Jagan Teki
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2016-09-03 8:22 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 4/5] configs: mx6ul: Move SPI/SPI-FLASH configs to defconfig Jagan Teki
@ 2016-09-03 8:22 ` Jagan Teki
2016-09-03 10:08 ` Peng Fan
` (2 more replies)
2016-09-04 2:27 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/5] imx: mx6ul: Refactor common code as mx6ul Fabio Estevam
4 siblings, 3 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jagan Teki @ 2016-09-03 8:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
i.MX6UL GEA M6UL modules are system on module solutions manufactured
by Engicam with following characteristics:
Processor NXP i.MX 6UltraLite MCIMX6G2, 528 MHz
RAM 128MB, 16-bit DDR3
NAND SLC 256MB
Power supply Single 5V
MAX LCD RES up to WXGA, 1366x768
Cc: Stefano Babic <sbabic@denx.de>
Cc: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
Cc: Michael Trimarchi <michael@amarulasolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@amarulasolutions.com>
---
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig | 6 ++++++
board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig | 2 +-
board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS | 5 +++++
board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c | 4 +++-
configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig | 11 +++++++++++
include/configs/mx6ul.h | 1 +
6 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig
index 0c1bc78..d861ded 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig
@@ -129,6 +129,12 @@ config TARGET_MX6UL_14X14_EVK
select DM_THERMAL
select SUPPORT_SPL
+config TARGET_MX6UL_GEAM_KIT
+ bool "mx6ul_geam_kit"
+ select MX6UL
+ select DM
+ select DM_THERMAL
+
config TARGET_NITROGEN6X
bool "nitrogen6x"
diff --git a/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig b/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
index f97b905..d902cd0 100644
--- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
+++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-if TARGET_MX6UL_14X14_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_9X9_EVK
+if TARGET_MX6UL_14X14_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_9X9_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_GEAM_KIT
config SYS_BOARD
default "mx6ul"
diff --git a/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS b/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
index 20caeee..3265858 100644
--- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
@@ -5,3 +5,8 @@ F: board/freescale/mx6ul/
F: include/configs/mx6ul.h
F: configs/mx6ul_14x14_evk_defconfig
F: configs/mx6ul_9x9_evk_defconfig
+
+Engicam GEAM6UL BOARD
+M: Jagan Teki <jagan@amarulasolutions.com>
+S: Maintained
+F: configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig
diff --git a/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c b/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
index 66d6795..f4e35bd 100644
--- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
+++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
@@ -693,8 +693,10 @@ int checkboard(void)
{
if (is_mx6ul_9x9_evk())
puts("Board: MX6UL 9x9 EVK\n");
- else
+ else if (is_mx6ul_14x14_evk())
puts("Board: MX6UL 14x14 EVK\n");
+ else
+ puts("Board: MX6UL GEA KIT\n");
return 0;
}
diff --git a/configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig b/configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b26f17b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+CONFIG_ARM=y
+CONFIG_ARCH_MX6=y
+CONFIG_TARGET_MX6UL_GEAM_KIT=y
+CONFIG_HUSH_PARSER=y
+CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT="geam6ul> "
+CONFIG_AUTO_COMPLETE=y
+CONFIG_SYS_MAXARGS=32
+CONFIG_BOOTDELAY=3
+CONFIG_BOARD_EARLY_INIT_F=y
+CONFIG_BOARD_LATE_INIT=y
+# CONFIG_CMD_IMLS is not set
diff --git a/include/configs/mx6ul.h b/include/configs/mx6ul.h
index f5bdb40..55460ad 100644
--- a/include/configs/mx6ul.h
+++ b/include/configs/mx6ul.h
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
#include <asm/imx-common/gpio.h>
#define is_mx6ul_9x9_evk() CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(TARGET_MX6UL_9X9_EVK)
+#define is_mx6ul_14x14_evk() CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(TARGET_MX6UL_14x14_EVK)
/* SPL options */
#define CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT
--
2.7.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL
2016-09-03 8:22 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL Jagan Teki
@ 2016-09-03 10:08 ` Peng Fan
2016-09-03 12:48 ` Jagan Teki
2016-09-04 1:26 ` Fabio Estevam
2016-09-04 13:08 ` Fabio Estevam
2 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Peng Fan @ 2016-09-03 10:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Hi Jagan,
On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 01:52:57PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
>i.MX6UL GEA M6UL modules are system on module solutions manufactured
>by Engicam with following characteristics:
>Processor NXP i.MX 6UltraLite MCIMX6G2, 528 MHz
>RAM 128MB, 16-bit DDR3
>NAND SLC 256MB
>Power supply Single 5V
>MAX LCD RES up to WXGA, 1366x768
>
>Cc: Stefano Babic <sbabic@denx.de>
>Cc: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
>Cc: Michael Trimarchi <michael@amarulasolutions.com>
>Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@amarulasolutions.com>
>---
> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig | 6 ++++++
> board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig | 2 +-
> board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS | 5 +++++
> board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c | 4 +++-
> configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig | 11 +++++++++++
> include/configs/mx6ul.h | 1 +
> 6 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig
>
>diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig
>index 0c1bc78..d861ded 100644
>--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig
>+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig
>@@ -129,6 +129,12 @@ config TARGET_MX6UL_14X14_EVK
> select DM_THERMAL
> select SUPPORT_SPL
>
>+config TARGET_MX6UL_GEAM_KIT
>+ bool "mx6ul_geam_kit"
>+ select MX6UL
>+ select DM
>+ select DM_THERMAL
>+
> config TARGET_NITROGEN6X
> bool "nitrogen6x"
>
>diff --git a/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig b/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
>index f97b905..d902cd0 100644
>--- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
>+++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
>@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>-if TARGET_MX6UL_14X14_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_9X9_EVK
>+if TARGET_MX6UL_14X14_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_9X9_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_GEAM_KIT
>
> config SYS_BOARD
> default "mx6ul"
>diff --git a/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS b/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
>index 20caeee..3265858 100644
>--- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
>+++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
>@@ -5,3 +5,8 @@ F: board/freescale/mx6ul/
> F: include/configs/mx6ul.h
> F: configs/mx6ul_14x14_evk_defconfig
> F: configs/mx6ul_9x9_evk_defconfig
>+
>+Engicam GEAM6UL BOARD
>+M: Jagan Teki <jagan@amarulasolutions.com>
>+S: Maintained
>+F: configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig
>diff --git a/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c b/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
>index 66d6795..f4e35bd 100644
>--- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
>+++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
>@@ -693,8 +693,10 @@ int checkboard(void)
> {
> if (is_mx6ul_9x9_evk())
> puts("Board: MX6UL 9x9 EVK\n");
>- else
>+ else if (is_mx6ul_14x14_evk())
> puts("Board: MX6UL 14x14 EVK\n");
>+ else
>+ puts("Board: MX6UL GEA KIT\n");
>
> return 0;
> }
>diff --git a/configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig b/configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig
>new file mode 100644
>index 0000000..b26f17b
>--- /dev/null
>+++ b/configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig
>@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
>+CONFIG_ARM=y
>+CONFIG_ARCH_MX6=y
>+CONFIG_TARGET_MX6UL_GEAM_KIT=y
>+CONFIG_HUSH_PARSER=y
>+CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT="geam6ul> "
>+CONFIG_AUTO_COMPLETE=y
>+CONFIG_SYS_MAXARGS=32
>+CONFIG_BOOTDELAY=3
>+CONFIG_BOARD_EARLY_INIT_F=y
>+CONFIG_BOARD_LATE_INIT=y
>+# CONFIG_CMD_IMLS is not set
I think you missed ddr script settings, SPL or DCD?
Regards,
Peng.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL
2016-09-03 10:08 ` Peng Fan
@ 2016-09-03 12:48 ` Jagan Teki
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jagan Teki @ 2016-09-03 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Hi Peng,
On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Peng Fan <van.freenix@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jagan,
>
> On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 01:52:57PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
>>i.MX6UL GEA M6UL modules are system on module solutions manufactured
>>by Engicam with following characteristics:
>>Processor NXP i.MX 6UltraLite MCIMX6G2, 528 MHz
>>RAM 128MB, 16-bit DDR3
>>NAND SLC 256MB
>>Power supply Single 5V
>>MAX LCD RES up to WXGA, 1366x768
>>
>>Cc: Stefano Babic <sbabic@denx.de>
>>Cc: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
>>Cc: Michael Trimarchi <michael@amarulasolutions.com>
>>Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@amarulasolutions.com>
>>---
>> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig | 6 ++++++
>> board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig | 2 +-
>> board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS | 5 +++++
>> board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c | 4 +++-
>> configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig | 11 +++++++++++
>> include/configs/mx6ul.h | 1 +
>> 6 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> create mode 100644 configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig
>>
>>diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig
>>index 0c1bc78..d861ded 100644
>>--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig
>>+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig
>>@@ -129,6 +129,12 @@ config TARGET_MX6UL_14X14_EVK
>> select DM_THERMAL
>> select SUPPORT_SPL
>>
>>+config TARGET_MX6UL_GEAM_KIT
>>+ bool "mx6ul_geam_kit"
>>+ select MX6UL
>>+ select DM
>>+ select DM_THERMAL
>>+
>> config TARGET_NITROGEN6X
>> bool "nitrogen6x"
>>
>>diff --git a/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig b/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
>>index f97b905..d902cd0 100644
>>--- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
>>+++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
>>@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>>-if TARGET_MX6UL_14X14_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_9X9_EVK
>>+if TARGET_MX6UL_14X14_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_9X9_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_GEAM_KIT
>>
>> config SYS_BOARD
>> default "mx6ul"
>>diff --git a/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS b/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
>>index 20caeee..3265858 100644
>>--- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
>>+++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
>>@@ -5,3 +5,8 @@ F: board/freescale/mx6ul/
>> F: include/configs/mx6ul.h
>> F: configs/mx6ul_14x14_evk_defconfig
>> F: configs/mx6ul_9x9_evk_defconfig
>>+
>>+Engicam GEAM6UL BOARD
>>+M: Jagan Teki <jagan@amarulasolutions.com>
>>+S: Maintained
>>+F: configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig
>>diff --git a/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c b/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
>>index 66d6795..f4e35bd 100644
>>--- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
>>+++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
>>@@ -693,8 +693,10 @@ int checkboard(void)
>> {
>> if (is_mx6ul_9x9_evk())
>> puts("Board: MX6UL 9x9 EVK\n");
>>- else
>>+ else if (is_mx6ul_14x14_evk())
>> puts("Board: MX6UL 14x14 EVK\n");
>>+ else
>>+ puts("Board: MX6UL GEA KIT\n");
>>
>> return 0;
>> }
>>diff --git a/configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig b/configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig
>>new file mode 100644
>>index 0000000..b26f17b
>>--- /dev/null
>>+++ b/configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig
>>@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
>>+CONFIG_ARM=y
>>+CONFIG_ARCH_MX6=y
>>+CONFIG_TARGET_MX6UL_GEAM_KIT=y
>>+CONFIG_HUSH_PARSER=y
>>+CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT="geam6ul> "
>>+CONFIG_AUTO_COMPLETE=y
>>+CONFIG_SYS_MAXARGS=32
>>+CONFIG_BOOTDELAY=3
>>+CONFIG_BOARD_EARLY_INIT_F=y
>>+CONFIG_BOARD_LATE_INIT=y
>>+# CONFIG_CMD_IMLS is not set
>
> I think you missed ddr script settings, SPL or DCD?
True - I will update the code once I tested on board and the reason
for sending this series earlier is to make an approval of existing
file name changes. Will that be OK?
Jagan.
--
Jagan Teki
Free Software Engineer | Amarula Solutions
U-Boot, Linux | Upstream Maintainer
Hyderabad, India.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL
2016-09-03 8:22 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL Jagan Teki
2016-09-03 10:08 ` Peng Fan
@ 2016-09-04 1:26 ` Fabio Estevam
2016-09-04 2:22 ` Jagan Teki
2016-09-04 2:23 ` Fabio Estevam
2016-09-04 13:08 ` Fabio Estevam
2 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Fabio Estevam @ 2016-09-04 1:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 5:22 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
> i.MX6UL GEA M6UL modules are system on module solutions manufactured
> by Engicam with following characteristics:
> Processor NXP i.MX 6UltraLite MCIMX6G2, 528 MHz
> RAM 128MB, 16-bit DDR3
> NAND SLC 256MB
> Power supply Single 5V
> MAX LCD RES up to WXGA, 1366x768
>
> Cc: Stefano Babic <sbabic@denx.de>
> Cc: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
> Cc: Michael Trimarchi <michael@amarulasolutions.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@amarulasolutions.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig | 6 ++++++
> board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig | 2 +-
This file does not exist.
> board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS | 5 +++++
> board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c | 4 +++-
This file does not exist.
> configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig | 11 +++++++++++
> include/configs/mx6ul.h | 1 +
This file does not exist.
You should generate a patch against u-boot-imx git tree.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL
2016-09-04 1:26 ` Fabio Estevam
@ 2016-09-04 2:22 ` Jagan Teki
2016-09-04 2:23 ` Fabio Estevam
1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jagan Teki @ 2016-09-04 2:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 6:56 AM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 5:22 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>> i.MX6UL GEA M6UL modules are system on module solutions manufactured
>> by Engicam with following characteristics:
>> Processor NXP i.MX 6UltraLite MCIMX6G2, 528 MHz
>> RAM 128MB, 16-bit DDR3
>> NAND SLC 256MB
>> Power supply Single 5V
>> MAX LCD RES up to WXGA, 1366x768
>>
>> Cc: Stefano Babic <sbabic@denx.de>
>> Cc: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
>> Cc: Michael Trimarchi <michael@amarulasolutions.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@amarulasolutions.com>
>> ---
>> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx6/Kconfig | 6 ++++++
>> board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig | 2 +-
>
> This file does not exist.
>
>> board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS | 5 +++++
>> board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c | 4 +++-
>
> This file does not exist.
>
>> configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig | 11 +++++++++++
>> include/configs/mx6ul.h | 1 +
>
> This file does not exist.
These files are the outcomes of previous patches on this series,
please find that.
>
> You should generate a patch against u-boot-imx git tree.
OK, will do that.
thanks!
--
Jagan.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL
2016-09-04 1:26 ` Fabio Estevam
2016-09-04 2:22 ` Jagan Teki
@ 2016-09-04 2:23 ` Fabio Estevam
2016-09-04 2:27 ` Jagan Teki
1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Fabio Estevam @ 2016-09-04 2:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Hi Jagan,
On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 10:26 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig | 11 +++++++++++
>> include/configs/mx6ul.h | 1 +
>
> This file does not exist.
Ok, I see you introduced these files on previous patches of the series.
I don't think it makes sense to have a global mx6ul.h though.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL
2016-09-04 2:23 ` Fabio Estevam
@ 2016-09-04 2:27 ` Jagan Teki
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jagan Teki @ 2016-09-04 2:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Hi Fabio,
On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 7:53 AM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jagan,
>
> On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 10:26 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> configs/mx6ul_geam_kit_defconfig | 11 +++++++++++
>>> include/configs/mx6ul.h | 1 +
>>
>> This file does not exist.
>
> Ok, I see you introduced these files on previous patches of the series.
>
> I don't think it makes sense to have a global mx6ul.h though.
Please review the respective patches and let me know your comments. I
strongly suspect the global mx6ul.h require as number board with same
soc have different defcoonfigs which is similar to the way common
imx6ul.dtsi with respective board dts files.
thanks!
--
Jagan.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL
2016-09-03 8:22 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL Jagan Teki
2016-09-03 10:08 ` Peng Fan
2016-09-04 1:26 ` Fabio Estevam
@ 2016-09-04 13:08 ` Fabio Estevam
2016-09-04 13:10 ` Michael Trimarchi
2016-09-04 13:32 ` Jagan Teki
2 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Fabio Estevam @ 2016-09-04 13:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Hi Jagan,
On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 5:22 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> diff --git a/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig b/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
> index f97b905..d902cd0 100644
> --- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
> +++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
At least for i.MX we follow the convention:
board/vendor/vendorboardname, so under board/freescale directory we
would expect boards manufactured by FSL/NXP only.
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -if TARGET_MX6UL_14X14_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_9X9_EVK
> +if TARGET_MX6UL_14X14_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_9X9_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_GEAM_KIT
>
> config SYS_BOARD
> default "mx6ul"
> diff --git a/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS b/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
> index 20caeee..3265858 100644
> --- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
> +++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
> @@ -5,3 +5,8 @@ F: board/freescale/mx6ul/
It would be better if you were listed as the maintainer of the Engicam
mx6ul board.
How can I person that does not have the hardware nor it is familiar
with it, be the maintainer of such platform?
> --- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
> +++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
> @@ -693,8 +693,10 @@ int checkboard(void)
> {
> if (is_mx6ul_9x9_evk())
> puts("Board: MX6UL 9x9 EVK\n");
> - else
> + else if (is_mx6ul_14x14_evk())
> puts("Board: MX6UL 14x14 EVK\n");
> + else
> + puts("Board: MX6UL GEA KIT\n");
>
> return 0;
If I want to change board.c to improve/fix the code for mx6ulevk there
is risk that such change could break mx6ulgea support.
I prefer that you place the new board at board/engicam/mx6ulgea, or something.
> --- a/include/configs/mx6ul.h
> +++ b/include/configs/mx6ul.h
> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> #include <asm/imx-common/gpio.h>
>
> #define is_mx6ul_9x9_evk() CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(TARGET_MX6UL_9X9_EVK)
> +#define is_mx6ul_14x14_evk() CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(TARGET_MX6UL_14x14_EVK)
This seems to be an unrelated change.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL
2016-09-04 13:08 ` Fabio Estevam
@ 2016-09-04 13:10 ` Michael Trimarchi
2016-09-04 13:32 ` Jagan Teki
1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Michael Trimarchi @ 2016-09-04 13:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Hi Fabio
On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 3:08 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jagan,
>
> On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 5:22 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> diff --git a/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig b/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
>> index f97b905..d902cd0 100644
>> --- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
>> +++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
>
> At least for i.MX we follow the convention:
> board/vendor/vendorboardname, so under board/freescale directory we
> would expect boards manufactured by FSL/NXP only.
>
>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>> -if TARGET_MX6UL_14X14_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_9X9_EVK
>> +if TARGET_MX6UL_14X14_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_9X9_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_GEAM_KIT
>>
>> config SYS_BOARD
>> default "mx6ul"
>> diff --git a/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS b/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
>> index 20caeee..3265858 100644
>> --- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
>> +++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
>> @@ -5,3 +5,8 @@ F: board/freescale/mx6ul/
>
> It would be better if you were listed as the maintainer of the Engicam
> mx6ul board.
>
> How can I person that does not have the hardware nor it is familiar
> with it, be the maintainer of such platform?
>
Hardware is on the way ;).
Michael
>> --- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
>> +++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
>> @@ -693,8 +693,10 @@ int checkboard(void)
>> {
>> if (is_mx6ul_9x9_evk())
>> puts("Board: MX6UL 9x9 EVK\n");
>> - else
>> + else if (is_mx6ul_14x14_evk())
>> puts("Board: MX6UL 14x14 EVK\n");
>> + else
>> + puts("Board: MX6UL GEA KIT\n");
>>
>> return 0;
>
> If I want to change board.c to improve/fix the code for mx6ulevk there
> is risk that such change could break mx6ulgea support.
>
> I prefer that you place the new board at board/engicam/mx6ulgea, or something.
>
>
>> --- a/include/configs/mx6ul.h
>> +++ b/include/configs/mx6ul.h
>> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>> #include <asm/imx-common/gpio.h>
>>
>> #define is_mx6ul_9x9_evk() CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(TARGET_MX6UL_9X9_EVK)
>> +#define is_mx6ul_14x14_evk() CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(TARGET_MX6UL_14x14_EVK)
>
> This seems to be an unrelated change.
> _______________________________________________
> U-Boot mailing list
> U-Boot at lists.denx.de
> http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
--
| Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi Amarula Solutions BV |
| COO - Founder Cruquiuskade 47 |
| +31(0)851119172 Amsterdam 1018 AM NL |
| [`as] http://www.amarulasolutions.com |
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL
2016-09-04 13:08 ` Fabio Estevam
2016-09-04 13:10 ` Michael Trimarchi
@ 2016-09-04 13:32 ` Jagan Teki
2016-09-04 14:47 ` Fabio Estevam
1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jagan Teki @ 2016-09-04 13:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Hi Fabio,
+ Tom (looking for any suggestions for not maintaining separate board
files if the board code is sharing different boards with same SOC)
On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 6:38 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jagan,
>
> On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 5:22 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> diff --git a/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig b/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
>> index f97b905..d902cd0 100644
>> --- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
>> +++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/Kconfig
>
> At least for i.MX we follow the convention:
> board/vendor/vendorboardname, so under board/freescale directory we
> would expect boards manufactured by FSL/NXP only.
Please see below for this.
>
>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>> -if TARGET_MX6UL_14X14_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_9X9_EVK
>> +if TARGET_MX6UL_14X14_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_9X9_EVK || TARGET_MX6UL_GEAM_KIT
>>
>> config SYS_BOARD
>> default "mx6ul"
>> diff --git a/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS b/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
>> index 20caeee..3265858 100644
>> --- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
>> +++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/MAINTAINERS
>> @@ -5,3 +5,8 @@ F: board/freescale/mx6ul/
>
> It would be better if you were listed as the maintainer of the Engicam
> mx6ul board.
>
> How can I person that does not have the hardware nor it is familiar
> with it, be the maintainer of such platform?
Please do read the thread fully before commenting, I've mentioned the
state of hardware when I relied to Peng. And also this is an RFC patch
I'm looking for comments on function like changes whether the flow of
adding code to existing software is meaningful or not and not intended
to directly applying these onto ML.
>
>> --- a/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
>> +++ b/board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
>> @@ -693,8 +693,10 @@ int checkboard(void)
>> {
>> if (is_mx6ul_9x9_evk())
>> puts("Board: MX6UL 9x9 EVK\n");
>> - else
>> + else if (is_mx6ul_14x14_evk())
>> puts("Board: MX6UL 14x14 EVK\n");
>> + else
>> + puts("Board: MX6UL GEA KIT\n");
>>
>> return 0;
>
> If I want to change board.c to improve/fix the code for mx6ulevk there
> is risk that such change could break mx6ulgea support.
>
> I prefer that you place the new board at board/engicam/mx6ulgea, or something.
But I prefer to maintain the same on board/freescale/imx6ul. Becuase,
If the most of the code is common to all boards with specific SOC it's
better to have common code for reusability instead of adding different
board files with duplicate code. For example please see board/sunxi or
board/xilinx/zynq where microzed, zed or zynbo not directly
manufactured from xilinx but they maintained as common.
>
>
>> --- a/include/configs/mx6ul.h
>> +++ b/include/configs/mx6ul.h
>> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>> #include <asm/imx-common/gpio.h>
>>
>> #define is_mx6ul_9x9_evk() CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(TARGET_MX6UL_9X9_EVK)
>> +#define is_mx6ul_14x14_evk() CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(TARGET_MX6UL_14x14_EVK)
>
> This seems to be an unrelated change.
OK, will fix.
thanks!
--
Jagan Teki
Free Software Engineer | www.openedev.com
U-Boot, Linux | Upstream Maintainer
Hyderabad, India.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL
2016-09-04 13:32 ` Jagan Teki
@ 2016-09-04 14:47 ` Fabio Estevam
2016-09-06 12:03 ` Tom Rini
0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Fabio Estevam @ 2016-09-04 14:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
> Please do read the thread fully before commenting, I've mentioned the
> state of hardware when I relied to Peng. And also this is an RFC patch
> I'm looking for comments on function like changes whether the flow of
> adding code to existing software is meaningful or not and not intended
> to directly applying these onto ML.
I have already stated my opinion that you should put your board code
into board/engicam.
> But I prefer to maintain the same on board/freescale/imx6ul. Becuase,
> If the most of the code is common to all boards with specific SOC it's
> better to have common code for reusability instead of adding different
> board files with duplicate code. For example please see board/sunxi or
> board/xilinx/zynq where microzed, zed or zynbo not directly
> manufactured from xilinx but they maintained as common.
All the ifdefery inside board/sunxi/board.c is exactly what I would
like to avoid here.
mx6ul is a recent SoC and there is only mx6ul evk and pico mx6ul
boards currently supported in U-Boot.
I don't think this can scale to support all upcoming boards into a
single board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c.
Why is mx6ul special in this case compared to the other mx6 variants?
Will you be able to support all mx6q boards into
board/freescale/mx6q/board.c as well?
I am sure this will be unmaintainable.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL
2016-09-04 14:47 ` Fabio Estevam
@ 2016-09-06 12:03 ` Tom Rini
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Tom Rini @ 2016-09-06 12:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 11:47:06AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Please do read the thread fully before commenting, I've mentioned the
> > state of hardware when I relied to Peng. And also this is an RFC patch
> > I'm looking for comments on function like changes whether the flow of
> > adding code to existing software is meaningful or not and not intended
> > to directly applying these onto ML.
>
> I have already stated my opinion that you should put your board code
> into board/engicam.
Yes, this sounds right.
> > But I prefer to maintain the same on board/freescale/imx6ul. Becuase,
> > If the most of the code is common to all boards with specific SOC it's
> > better to have common code for reusability instead of adding different
> > board files with duplicate code. For example please see board/sunxi or
> > board/xilinx/zynq where microzed, zed or zynbo not directly
> > manufactured from xilinx but they maintained as common.
>
> All the ifdefery inside board/sunxi/board.c is exactly what I would
> like to avoid here.
Now, in fairness to sunxi, that's more like what would happen if you
decided to support all of the imx6 and imx7 SoCs in a single board.c.
> mx6ul is a recent SoC and there is only mx6ul evk and pico mx6ul
> boards currently supported in U-Boot.
>
> I don't think this can scale to support all upcoming boards into a
> single board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c.
>
> Why is mx6ul special in this case compared to the other mx6 variants?
>
> Will you be able to support all mx6q boards into
> board/freescale/mx6q/board.c as well?
>
> I am sure this will be unmaintainable.
I suspect there's a certain amount of code that should be in
arch/arm/mach-imx/board.c like a __weak dram_init() and maybe some
${soc}.c files too for things that really aren't board specific but
rather SoC-required. Of course I'm biased since this is how the TI
stuff evolved to.
But also, if the enigcam board is an example of "take the ref board, cut
it down a bit, ship" or even "take the ref board, tweak slightly", there
will still be some code duplication as they simply made the same board
decisions that NXP did in the reference platform.
--
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20160906/e0ba70ba/attachment.sig>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/5] imx: mx6ul: Refactor common code as mx6ul
2016-09-03 8:22 [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/5] imx: mx6ul: Refactor common code as mx6ul Jagan Teki
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2016-09-03 8:22 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH RFC 5/5] imx: mx6ul: Add initial board support for Engicam GEAM6UL Jagan Teki
@ 2016-09-04 2:27 ` Fabio Estevam
2016-09-04 2:30 ` Jagan Teki
4 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Fabio Estevam @ 2016-09-04 2:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Hi Jagan,
On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 5:22 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
> Since most of the board along with the config code used for
> mx6ul boards are common and for improving code reusability
> refactor or group code as mx6ul notation. Hence for new board
> its simply add new defconfig with existing board or related configs.
>
> include/configs/mx6ul_14x14_evk.h -> include/configs/mx6ul.h
> board/freescale/mx6ul_14x14_evk -> board/freescale/mx6ul
> board/freescale/mx6ul/mx6ul_14x14_evk.c -> board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
I think this will be hard to maintain. I still prefer each board to be
added on its own board file/dts.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/5] imx: mx6ul: Refactor common code as mx6ul
2016-09-04 2:27 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/5] imx: mx6ul: Refactor common code as mx6ul Fabio Estevam
@ 2016-09-04 2:30 ` Jagan Teki
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jagan Teki @ 2016-09-04 2:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Hi Fabio,
On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 7:57 AM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jagan,
>
> On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 5:22 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Since most of the board along with the config code used for
>> mx6ul boards are common and for improving code reusability
>> refactor or group code as mx6ul notation. Hence for new board
>> its simply add new defconfig with existing board or related configs.
>>
>> include/configs/mx6ul_14x14_evk.h -> include/configs/mx6ul.h
>> board/freescale/mx6ul_14x14_evk -> board/freescale/mx6ul
>> board/freescale/mx6ul/mx6ul_14x14_evk.c -> board/freescale/mx6ul/board.c
>
> I think this will be hard to maintain. I still prefer each board to be
> added on its own board file/dts.
Initially I started of doing this, but I find most of the redundant
code board as well in configs, its better follow this kind of notation
because most of the remaining soc board files are so mature like this
sunxi, zynq.
thanks!
--
Jagan.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread