Hi Stefan,
On 29 October 2014 18:32, Stefan Roese <s...@denx.de> wrote:
> Hi Simon!
>
> On 14.10.2014 07:41, Simon Glass wrote:
>>
>> Add a uclass which provides access to SPI buses and includes operations
>> required by SPI.
>>
>> For a time driver model will need to co-exist with the legacy SPI
>> interface
>> so some parts of the header file are changed depending on which is in use.
>> The exports are adjusted also since some functions are not available with
>> driver model.
>>
>> Boards must define CONFIG_DM_SPI to use driver model for SPI.
>
>
> I'm starting to use DM now. Finally! ;)
>
> In my case I'm implementing the Designware master SPI driver for the
> SoCFPGA. And since its a new driver it really makes sense to use DM
> directly. I'm starting to get an overview now. One thing though that I
> noticed is, that the SPI DM implementation seems to be a bit FDT centric.
> Please see below.
>
> <snip>
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-uclass.c b/drivers/spi/spi-uclass.c
>
> <snip>
>
>> +int spi_post_bind(struct udevice *dev)
>> +{
>> + /* Scan the bus for devices */
>> + return dm_scan_fdt_node(dev, gd->fdt_blob, dev->of_offset, false);
>> +}
>
>
> SoCFPGA currently does not support CONFIG_OF_CONTROL (no dtb supplied). So
> I'm planning to use platform_data to instantiate the device. Something like
> this in the board file:
>
> static const struct dw_spi_platdata spi_platdata = {
> .base = SOCFPGA_SPIM0_ADDRESS,
> };
>
> U_BOOT_DEVICE(dw_spi) = {
> .name = "dw_spi",
> .platdata = &spi_platdata,
> };
>
> What would the non-fdt method have to be to bind the device in
> spi_post_bind() above?
At present dm-spi support mostly devicetree driven - Will update you
soon for non-devicetree base.
thanks!
--
Jagan.
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
