On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 1:57 PM Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019 at 00:15, Simon Goldschmidt > <simon.k.r.goldschm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 10:20 PM Simon Goldschmidt > > <simon.k.r.goldschm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Am Fr., 21. Dez. 2018, 22:16 hat Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > > > geschrieben: > > >> > > >> Hi Simon, > > >> > > >> On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 14:32, Simon Goldschmidt > > >> <simon.k.r.goldschm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > Am 20.12.2018 um 21:53 schrieb Simon Goldschmidt: > > >> > > Am 20.12.2018 um 18:37 schrieb Simon Glass: > > >> > >> Hi Simon, > > >> > >> > > >> > >> On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 08:03, Simon Goldschmidt > > >> > >> <simon.k.r.goldschm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> Am 20.12.2018 um 15:49 schrieb Simon Glass: > > >> > >>>> Hi Simon, > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 at 14:06, Simon Goldschmidt > > >> > >>>> <simon.k.r.goldschm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> Hi, > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> while searching for bytes to save in SPL in order to add FIT > > >> > >>>>> signature > > >> > >>>>> handling, I am currently trying to get socfpga-gen5 to use > > >> > >>>>> OF_PLATDATA. > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> To begin, I stripped down socfpga_socrates_defconfig to > > >> > >>>>> absolutely > > >> > >>>>> nothing but serial drivers in SPL (with some modifications to the > > >> > >>>>> Kconfig) and enabled DEBUG_UART to see what's going on. > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> Now while this config runs OK with a dtb (it just won't boot as > > >> > >>>>> drivers > > >> > >>>>> are missing -> "failed to boot from all boot devices"), it does > > >> > >>>>> not find > > >> > >>>>> the serial driver after enabling OF_PLATDATA. > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> So since serial_rockchip.c already uses OF_PLATDATA and is based > > >> > >>>>> on > > >> > >>>>> ns16550 that my socfpga-gen5 platform is using: what do I have > > >> > >>>>> to do > > >> > >>>>> besides enabling OF_PLATDATA to get this working? > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> I just seems like uclass_first_device does not find any > > >> > >>>>> UCLASS_SERIAL > > >> > >>>>> deivce when OF_PLATDATA is enabled. > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> There is the of-plat.txt README. > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> Yes, I should have mentioned I already read that and still had > > >> > >>> those > > >> > >>> questions. Kconfig help says README.platdata though. We probably > > >> > >>> should > > >> > >>> update that link. > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>>> Basically the dtoc tool creates U_BOOT_DEVICE() declarations and > > >> > >>>> links > > >> > >>>> them with SPL. These should show up in your image and therefore be > > >> > >>>> bound. You can call dm_dump_all() in SPL to see what what devices > > >> > >>>> are > > >> > >>>> bound. I presume you are calling spl_init()? > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> You can look at what dtoc produces. The example serial driver for > > >> > >>>> Rockchip is serial_rockchip.c > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> I saw that as an example (because I also have an ns16550 > > >> > >>> compatible on > > >> > >>> my board) but couldn't figure out why it is not bound. By debugging > > >> > >>> 'dm_scan_platdata', 'lists_bind_drivers' and > > >> > >>> 'device_bind_by_name', by > > >> > >>> now I know the driver names don't match. That is something I did > > >> > >>> not get > > >> > >>> just by reading of-plat.txt. I'll work on a patch to clarify that > > >> > >>> document. > > >> > >> > > >> > >> Yes I'd really appreciate some patches here. It is hard to know what > > >> > >> people won't understand and this feature could really do with a more > > >> > >> details docs or a walk-through. > > >> > >> > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> Right now, serial works. I had to add a new platform specific > > >> > >>> driver > > >> > >>> just like serial_rockchip though. For DTS, we can pass multiple > > >> > >>> 'compatible' strings, but for platdata, we have to create multiple > > >> > >>> drivers. That's a bit strange when porting boards... > > >> > >> > > >> > >> Yes it is. I'm not sure how to solve that though. Probably dtoc can > > >> > >> be > > >> > >> made smarter. Ideally you only need one device of each uclass in > > >> > >> SPL. > > >> > > > > >> > > Would it work to use the unchanged 'compatible' string for the > > >> > > '.name' > > >> > > of U_BOOT_DEVICE generated by dtoc? Then the binding of such drivers > > >> > > could change from comparing names to comparing to compatibles. That > > >> > > would make it more DTS-like. > > >> > > > > >> > > Then, I think we could need some kind of fallback code for properties > > >> > > that are optional in the DTS. Maybe we can create defines for each > > >> > > dtd > > >> > > struct so that drivers can test the existence of dtd sturct fields > > >> > > using > > >> > > #ifdef. [Given the special usage, I guess it's OK to assume that > > >> > > theses > > >> > > structs are only used once per DTS so that we don't have to worry > > >> > > about > > >> > > how to solve this for multiple occurrences with different optional > > >> > > parameters?] > > >> > > > > >> > > Oh, and then I think dtb_platdata.py should create the dtd instances > > >> > > as > > >> > > const. I'll prepare a patch for that. > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> (And when answering this, keep in mind I need to get MMC and QSPI > > >> > >>>>> drivers working with OF_PLATDATA - I already fixed compiler > > >> > >>>>> errors in > > >> > >>>>> those, nothing more.) > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> Yes MMC should be OK, but QSPI might be blazing a bit of a trail. > > >> > > > >> > Hmm, QSPI works as well when hacking the things that the driver wants > > >> > to > > >> > parse from subnode properties. However, I haven't found a way to access > > >> > the platform data of the spi-flash from the driver. > > >> > > > >> > Maybe we need to somehow make subnodes available in the dt-platdata > > >> > structs to make that work? > > >> > > >> There is support for phandles but not for parent relationships. I > > >> suppose it would not be impossible to add that in dtoc with a 'parent' > > >> pointer. > > > > > > > > > SPI flash actually needs it the other way round. At least the cadence > > > qspi driver I'm using checks for a subnode that describes the flash chip. > > > > > > I'll see if I can add that to dtoc. > > > > By now I have SPI successfully running with platdata by adding child > > arrays to the platdata struct via dtoc. > > > > However, probing the flash chip is not found in 'spi_get_bus_and_cs' > > and so the transfer falls back to 100 kHz, which is of course bad. > > That code expects a udevice child under the spi udevice. Looks like > > that needs more changes than just in dtoc? > > > > Did you have SPI running with platdata on any board, yet? > > No. The implementation does not deal well with parent/child > relationships, as with buses, and in every case we need to make > changes.
I had done those changes to dtoc, but as Marek seems so opposed to getting this integrated for socfpga, I don't know if I'll continue down that road... > That said, spi_get_bus_and_cs() is only used if you don't have the SPI > device in the DT. Hmm, I thought the way that spl_spi.c uses the spi flash framework would result in spi_get_bus_and_cs() being used. I'll need to check that again. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
