Hi Stefan, Simon, On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Stefan Roese <s...@denx.de> wrote: > Hi Simon, > > On 22.02.2017 04:59, Simon Glass wrote: > > <snip> > >>>>> What if the board mounts a flash with a different SPI flash command >>>>> set? Will this work? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Frankly, I can't tell for sure but its very likely. As you might >>>> have guessed, these defines are taken from coreboot where they are >>>> usually board specific and written in the last stage before booting >>>> into the OS (IIRC). It would definitely make sense to add a mechanism >>>> to configure these BIOS parameters in a board-specific way. So that >>>> boards can choose to (optionally) provide different values. >>>> >>>> An easy way to do this, would be to make the newly created function >>>> spi_controller_config() a wear default. This way, board can always >>>> overwrite these default values (and / or do other stuff) in their >>>> board specific code. This could also be added in a follow up patch >>>> once this is needed though. I still have to see such a case of an >>>> "incompatible" SPI flash on x86, and IIRC all values in coreboot >>>> were identical. >>> >>> >>> I am OK with the weak implementation, but I know Simon dislikes weak >>> :) Maybe he has a better idea. >>> >>> Let's hear what others think. >> >> >> Well how about crossing that bridge when we come to it? For now, >> perhaps this is good enough. > > > Thanks. > >> You are right, I'm not keen on weak >> functions as I see them as ad-hoc APIs. Better, I believe, to think >> about it and define a real API. For example in this case I wonder if >> the remove() method of the SPI driver could do something? Or perhaps >> add another method like finalise()? > > > Okay, lets think about this in more detail, once its necessary. >
What's next step for this patch? I see Stefan has done some patches on dm core. Regards, Bin _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
