From: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ns16550: allow UART address to be set dynamically
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 15:58:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50CFA394.40901@wwwdotorg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121217223745.0476C202B05@gemini.denx.de>
On 12/17/2012 03:37 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Stephen Warren,
>
> In message <50CF9BAA.3050504@wwwdotorg.org> you wrote:
>>
>> There are many ways besides device tree to enumerate hardware. For
>> example, consider PCI or USB (albeit USB isn't memory mapped). I don't
>
> Yes, there are. But your console port cannot be compred against
> dynamically populated and scannable bus interfaces like USB or PCI,
> and I think you are aware of that.
I honestly don't know why you couldn't have a PCI-based console UART.
>> think we should tie any new U-Boot dynamic device registration API to
>> device tree, since that would seem to prevent (or imply against) usage
>> of that API with PCI for example.
>
> Not any dynamic device registration. But here, it actually AIN'T
> dynamic - it is fully static, just board dependent.
If you want to run the same U-Boot binary on multiple different boards,
then that does make the UART selection dynamic. There's no conceptual
difference between dynamic information coming from a DT passed to U-Boot
at runtime, SoC-defined enumeration/selection mechanisms such as Tegra's
ODMDATA, or scanning a PCI bus.
Or, is U-Boot going to ban addressing TI's case where the UART selection
is stored in an I2C EEPROM that can be read at run-time, since instead
during flashing that information could be extracted and hard-coded into
the board's device tree instead?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-17 22:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-12 23:23 [U-Boot] [PATCH] ns16550: allow UART address to be set dynamically Stephen Warren
2012-12-12 23:38 ` Simon Glass
2012-12-12 23:52 ` Stephen Warren
2012-12-13 0:38 ` Simon Glass
2012-12-13 10:29 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-12-13 18:17 ` Stephen Warren
2012-12-13 20:36 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-12-13 20:45 ` Stephen Warren
2012-12-13 20:53 ` Tom Rini
2012-12-13 21:07 ` Stephen Warren
2012-12-13 21:51 ` Simon Glass
2012-12-14 20:40 ` Tom Rini
2012-12-14 21:14 ` Simon Glass
2012-12-14 22:03 ` Stephen Warren
2012-12-14 22:22 ` Simon Glass
2012-12-14 22:45 ` Stephen Warren
2012-12-17 21:09 ` Tom Rini
2012-12-17 22:24 ` Stephen Warren
2012-12-17 22:37 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-12-17 22:58 ` Stephen Warren [this message]
2012-12-18 6:39 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-12-18 16:37 ` Stephen Warren
2012-12-18 19:15 ` Simon Glass
2012-12-17 21:09 ` Tom Rini
2012-12-14 22:35 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-12-14 21:52 ` Stephen Warren
2012-12-14 22:31 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-12-14 22:26 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-12-14 23:16 ` Graeme Russ
2012-12-15 0:32 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-12-15 1:32 ` Graeme Russ
2012-12-15 7:30 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-12-15 9:53 ` Graeme Russ
2012-12-17 21:04 ` Tom Rini
2012-12-13 23:11 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-12-13 23:26 ` Stephen Warren
2012-12-13 10:27 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-12-13 13:11 ` Tom Rini
2012-12-13 14:22 ` Wolfgang Denk
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=50CFA394.40901@wwwdotorg.org \
--to=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox