Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] dm: Add a No-op uclass

2019-04-01 Thread Simon Glass
Hi Jean-Jacques, On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 at 05:32, Jean-Jacques Hiblot wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > On 30/03/2019 22:18, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Jean-Jacques, > > > > On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 at 10:44, Jean-Jacques Hiblot wrote: > >> This uclass is intended for devices that do not need any features from the

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] dm: Add a No-op uclass

2019-04-01 Thread Jean-Jacques Hiblot
Hi Simon, On 30/03/2019 22:18, Simon Glass wrote: Hi Jean-Jacques, On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 at 10:44, Jean-Jacques Hiblot wrote: This uclass is intended for devices that do not need any features from the uclass, including binding children. This will typically be used by devices that are used to bi

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] dm: Add a No-op uclass

2019-03-30 Thread Simon Glass
Hi Jean-Jacques, On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 at 10:44, Jean-Jacques Hiblot wrote: > > This uclass is intended for devices that do not need any features from the > uclass, including binding children. > This will typically be used by devices that are used to bind child devices > but do not use dm_scan_fdt_

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] dm: Add a No-op uclass

2019-03-25 Thread Jean-Jacques Hiblot
Hi Sergey, On 22/03/2019 18:39, Sergey Kubushyn wrote: On Fri, 22 Mar 2019, Jean-Jacques Hiblot wrote: It is probably the right solution, just have one suggestion -- why wouldn't we make it UCLASS_GLUE instead? NOP is too generic, IMHO and it is just NOP. There is definitely a place for such

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] dm: Add a No-op uclass

2019-03-22 Thread Sergey Kubushyn
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019, Jean-Jacques Hiblot wrote: It is probably the right solution, just have one suggestion -- why wouldn't we make it UCLASS_GLUE instead? NOP is too generic, IMHO and it is just NOP. There is definitely a place for such thing but we might want to add some specific functionality