Hi Ken, On 26 December 2017 at 03:38, Ken Ma <m...@marvell.com> wrote: > Hi Simon & Joe > > I've cc the mail, thanks! > > BTW, I've implemented Marvell MDIO in plain MDIO APIs as other vendors. > > Thanks a lot for your kind help! > Yours, > Ken > > -----Original Message----- > From: s...@google.com [mailto:s...@google.com] On Behalf Of Simon Glass > Sent: 2017年12月22日 1:19 > To: Ken Ma > Cc: joe.hershber...@gmail.com; Wilson Ding; Nadav Haklai; Hua Jing; Victor > Gu; Igal Liberman; Stefan Chulski; Stefan Roese > Subject: [EXT] Re: Would you please give some advice on our MDIO driver > implementaion? > > External Email > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Hi, > > Please can you cc the mailing list for U-Boot things? > > Regards, > Simon > > > On 20 December 2017 at 23:55, Ken Ma <m...@marvell.com> wrote: >> Dear Joe and Simon >> >> Excuse me. >> >> U-boot v2018 doesn’t have the MDIO support for Armada SoCs(MDIO function is >> implemented in net driver - MVPP2 and NETA). >> >> We need an unified Marvell MDIO driver for both SMI and XSMI and for >> both MVPP2 and NETA, the driver can handle complicated mux of PHY and MDIO >> bus across different CP module (for example, in a8k MC boards CP1 ETH0 are >> connected PHY8 of CP0 XMDIO, CP1 and CP0 are in different address ranges). >> >> Now there is no MDIO U-CLASS driver and no MDIO U-CLASS id in u-boot 2018, >> other vendors implement their MDIO drivers in plain APIs. >> >> My question is whether we should implement MDIO driver in U-CLASS DM >> model(in this case, mdio-uclass driver needs to be added). >> >> Or is it OK to just provide plain MDIO APIs as other vendors in our Marvell >> MDIO driver? >> >> Would you please give some advice on our MDIO driver implementation? >> >> >> Thanks a lot for your kind help! >> >> Yours, >> Ken >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Stefan Roese [mailto:s...@denx.de] >> Sent: 2017年12月21日 14:03 >> To: Ken Ma >> Cc: Wilson Ding; Nadav Haklai; Hua Jing; Victor Gu; Igal Liberman; >> Stefan Chulski >> Subject: Re: Would you please give some advice on our MDIO driver >> implementaion? >> >> Hi Ken, >> >> On 19.12.2017 10:42, Ken Ma wrote: >>> Hi Stefan >>> >>> Excuse me. >>> >>> U-boot v2018 doesn’t have the MDIO support for Armada SoCs(MDIO >>> function is implemented in net driver - MVPP2 and NETA), >>> >>> we need an unified Marvell MDIO driver for both SMI and XSMI, the >>> driver can handle complicated mux of PHY and MDIO bus across >>> different CP modules >>> >>> (for example, in a8k MC boards CP1 ETH0 are connected PHY8 of CP0 XMDIO). >>> >>> Now there is no MDIO U-CLASS driver and no MDIO U-CLASS id in u-boot >>> 2017, other vendors implement their MDIO driver in plain APIs. >>> >>> Our question is whether we should implement MDIO driver in U-CLASS DM >>> model(in this case, mdio-uclass driver needs to be added). >>> >>> Or is it OK to just provide plain MDIO APIs as other vendors in our >>> Marvell MDIO driver? >>> >>> Would you please give some advice on our MDIO driver implementation? >> >> Implementing a MDIO UCLASS driver would be preferred - at least this is my >> first feeling about this. But frankly, I can't decide this. You can either >> implement your MDIO / PHY interface in the "normal, plain" APIs and send it >> to the list for review and upstream acceptance. But you are correct, that >> you might receive comments about using DM with a new MDIO UCLASS for this. >> So perhaps its best if you send a mail to the list to ask about this before >> implementing it without DM support. >> Please add Joe Hershberger <joe.hershber...@gmail.com> (net custodian) and >> Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> (DM custodian) to Cc, if you decide to check >> on the list. >> >> Thanks, >> Stefan >>
Yes this should use driver model. We are likely to start removing non-DM in 2018 - e,g. boards that don't use CONFIG_BLK will start being removed after April, I think. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
