Hi Simon, On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 07:51:53PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: >Hi Peng, > >On 11 March 2016 at 21:21, Peng Fan <van.free...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Simon, >> >> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 05:33:05PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: >>>Hi Peng, >>> >>>On 10 March 2016 at 01:57, Peng Fan <van.free...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Support Driver Model for fsl esdhc driver. >>>> >>>> In order to minimize the change, reuse the fsl_esdhc_initialize function. >>>> This new way is to fill an fsl_esdhc_cfg struture and pass it >>>> to fsl_esdhc_initialize, just like the code in different board codes. >>>> >>>> Introduce a 'struct mmc *mmc' entry in fsl_esdhc_cfg structure, >>>> otherwise fsl_esdhc_initialize may need to be restructured which will >>>> cause lots changes for board code. >>>> >>>> Since clk driver is not implemented, use mxc_get_clock here to >>>> fill cfg->sdhc_clk. Anyway we can utilize the pinctrl imx driver >>>> now, except the SPL part, we can drop the pinmux settings from >>>> board file for mmc. >>>> >>>> There are so many "ifdef" in the file, maybe we can use driver data >>>> or quirks to cover these. But to minimize changes for this patch, >>>> these are not included. Later we can try to discard the nasty >>>> ifdef. >>>> >>>> Has been tested on i.MX6UL 9x9 EVK board: >>>> " >>>> =>dm tree >>>> .... >>>> simple_bus [ + ] | `-- aips-bus@02100000 >>>> mmc [ + ] | |-- usdhc@02190000 >>>> mmc [ + ] | |-- usdhc@02194000 >>>> .... >>>> => mmc list >>>> FSL_SDHC: 0 (SD) >>>> FSL_SDHC: 1 (SD) >>>> " >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <van.free...@gmail.com> >>>> Cc: York Sun <york....@nxp.com> >>>> Cc: Yangbo Lu <yangbo...@nxp.com> >>>> Cc: Hector Palacios <hector.palac...@digi.com> >>>> Cc: Eric Nelson <e...@nelint.com> >>>> Cc: Stefano Babic <sba...@denx.de> >>>> Cc: Fabio Estevam <fabio.este...@nxp.com> >>>> Cc: Pantelis Antoniou <pa...@antoniou-consulting.com> >>>> Cc: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c | 81 >>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> include/fsl_esdhc.h | 1 + >>>> 2 files changed, 82 insertions(+) >>> >>>I'm nervous about this patch. It is calling board code from a driver, >>>which we should avoid. >> >> No. I may need to write more in the commit log. >> The current way without driver model is >> board code fill fsl_esdhc_cfg strucure and then call fsl_esdhc_initialize >> which is in driver/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c. >> >> In order to minimize changes, in this patch, the probe function >> will fill fsl_esdhc_cfg structure and call fsl_esdhc_initialize. >> >> Then we can drop the function call to fsl_esdhc_initialize in different >> board code. >> >> I originally want to rewrite fsl_esdhc_cfg structure, may give it a new name >> such as fsl_esdhc_platdata or priv, but this may incur lots changes in >> board code, because board code also refers to this structure. So I keep in. >> >>>Perhaps it would be better to start by refactoring things to fix the >>>problems you mention, and then come back to this patch? I'm worried >>>we'll end up with a driver model conversion that never gets properly >>>finished if we do things in the wrong order. >> >> Please kind take my upper words. I am still thinking add "non-removable", >> "cd-gpios" related code in this patch, so I'll write a new version patch. > >When will this work be finished, so that the driver does not call board code?
Yeah. The driver does not call board code. My commit log may be misleading. I have restructured my patch. After do some basic test, will send out v2 version tommorow or some day:) Thanks, Peng. > >At least, we should have a TODO here > >Regards, >Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
