From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 14:44:53 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] [RFC] net: smc911x: Drop the standalone EEPROM example In-Reply-To: <8921db1f-f494-e237-a624-fcab8dfd688f@gmail.com> References: <20200314231857.3161106-1-marek.vasut+renesas@gmail.com> <20200317183004.GV12423@bill-the-cat> <53e05978-b941-08bc-18a7-6551f3cc1e88@gmail.com> <20200317184217.GW12423@bill-the-cat> <8921db1f-f494-e237-a624-fcab8dfd688f@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20200317184453.GX12423@bill-the-cat> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 07:43:11PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 3/17/20 7:42 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 07:39:49PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> On 3/17/20 7:30 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > >>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 07:23:07PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > >>>> On 3/17/20 7:10 PM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 8:19 AM Marek Vasut wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Drop the example, for two reasons. First, it is tapping directly into > >>>>>> the IO accessors of the SMC911x, while it should instead go through > >>>>>> the net device API. Second, this makes conversion of the SMC911x driver > >>>>>> to DM real hard. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > >>>>>> Cc: Joe Hershberger > >>>>>> Cc: Tom Rini > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> examples/standalone/Makefile | 1 - > >>>>>> examples/standalone/smc911x_eeprom.c | 379 --------------------------- > >>>>>> 2 files changed, 380 deletions(-) > >>>>>> delete mode 100644 examples/standalone/smc911x_eeprom.c > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Yeah, I was disturbed by this example code. > >>>>> > >>>>> I agree we should drop it. > >>>>> > >>>>> Reviewed-by: Masahiro Yamada > >>>> > >>>> Well I dunno. Can this be rewritten on top of DM somehow ? Do we even > >>>> have U-Boot application API to access DM EEPROM ? > >>> > >>> We should just drop it I think. The biggest surface we have today for > >>> external application is EFI application now, not U-Boot specific API. > >>> We can't drop the API but we don't expand it without very good reason. > >> > >> But this drops the ability to access the SMC911x EEPROM too. > >> So maybe we need some DM EEPROM implementation in the SMC911x driver ? > >> Does anyone have SMC911x with an external EEPROM ? > > > > All this does is drop an example. I don't see anything removing API > > code itself. > > Where did I say anything about API code ? Nowhere, which is my point. You're just dropping an example, not the ability to do $X. -- Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 659 bytes Desc: not available URL: