On 11 May 2015 at 13:18, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: > On Sunday, May 10, 2015 at 07:53:46 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: > > [...] > >> > As per my early comments on this thread, I'm not happy with this approach >> > of being added flash specific in generic code by simply added like this. >> > >> > I encounter similar issue before and I simply reverted [1] >> > http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=commit;h=122d805fd4bd478bb83536348291d >> > 34ae648364b >> > >> > Please think in a different perceptive like adding any flags to specific >> > vendor with specific part, but that also require proper tested. >> >> Ok, could you explain how you'd like to have it solved? Should we just >> call spi_flash_cmd() from socfpga-specific code? >> >> But I'm pretty sure similar issue will be encountered on different >> boards, so it would be good to have it in shared place. Do you want me >> to create sf_probe_micron and move it there? > > I'd just add a flag into the SPI NOR table and in the code, I'd check > if the flag is set and if so, trigger the Micron-specific code. That > ought to be simple and it doesn't introduce any new config options.
Ok, solutions - what about Linux same issue or this requirement should be only for u-boot or bootloaders? thanks! -- Jagan Teki, Openedev. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
