Am Freitag, den 25.01.2013, 14:04 -0800 schrieb Stephen Warren:
> On 01/24/2013 08:48 AM, Lucas Stach wrote:
> > Init pinmux in one shot, in order to avoid any conflicts.
>
> > diff --git a/board/avionic-design/common/tamonten.c
> > b/board/avionic-design/common/tamonten.c
>
> > +static struct pingroup_config tamonten_pinmux[] = {
> > + PINMUX_ENTRY(ATA, IDE, NORMAL, NORMAL), /* GPIO */
> > + PINMUX_ENTRY(ATB, SDIO4, NORMAL, NORMAL), /* MMC */
> ...
>
> I believe this initializes every single pingroup on the SoC to
> something. In order to prevent any behavior changes, wouldn't it be
> better to first fill in this table only with entries that achieve the
> same pinmux programming that used to be performed by the C code you're
> removing? Then, a separate later patch could fill in missing items in
> the pinmux table. I think that'd end up being much safer and easier to
> validate.
>
As I wrote in the cover letter this initializes the pinmux to the same
values the Linux kernel uses. I don't consider it a safer approach to
pull out the old pinmux from the C Code and then later building a
conflict free full muxtable out of this.
However I made sure to go through the C Code to see which pads need to
be un-tristated. At that time I cross-checked the table with the
functions used by the C Code. But as a human I'm not safe from mistakes.
Regards,
Lucas
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
