From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 15:58:28 -0700
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ns16550: allow UART address to be set
	dynamically
In-Reply-To: <20121217223745.0476C202B05@gemini.denx.de>
References: <1355354590-10023-1-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
	<CAPnjgZ3PZDVEHOPBsKD-tO8opezcTP=ZHvrSztwbTcioSJy+Fg@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C918A5.6090207@wwwdotorg.org>
	<20121213102950.17EC320120D@gemini.denx.de>
	<50CA1BB8.4000704@wwwdotorg.org>
	<20121213203604.1DD9F201213@gemini.denx.de>
	<50CA3E7A.8020407@wwwdotorg.org> <50CA4056.8060900@ti.com>
	<50CA437F.7060704@wwwdotorg.org>
	<CAPnjgZ0H6+KkcZZqR2Cng9XK=A-buuq-9z_EVTTA+EdKcZxDVw@mail.gmail.com>
	<50CB8ED1.7020503@ti.com>
	<CAPnjgZ1eVLA-ujsR21kA18aZLripzxEKRakWbBtDtv_2hFy3eA@mail.gmail.com>
	<50CBA217.3070202@wwwdotorg.org>
	<CAPnjgZ06-c3UW4D=qfW-H6bCXHMkc_8-4mgNKwO=n0OG9dFrFQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<50CBABF6.7040104@wwwdotorg.org> <50CF89F7.307@ti.com>
	<50CF9BAA.3050504@wwwdotorg.org>
	<20121217223745.0476C202B05@gemini.denx.de>
Message-ID: <50CFA394.40901@wwwdotorg.org>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.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?