On 12/8/19 3:28 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > On Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 10:59 AM Christian Mauderer <l...@c-mauderer.de > <mailto:l...@c-mauderer.de>> wrote: > > Hello, > > while mentoring Vijays GSoC project this year I noted that some drivers > in the Beagle BSPs have quite horrible hard coded values for things like > pinmux initialization. Maybe it would be a nice GSoC project for next > year to replace this stuff with a fdt based initialization. I would like > to ask for feedback before creating a ticket for it because it would > mean a quite big change for the BSP (maybe even the name - see below). > > Basically such a project would include the following parts: > > - Parse the pinmux settings from FDT and create a two part driver for a > 'pinctrl-single' compatible FDT entry. One part generic, one device > specific (similar to FreeBSD or Linux). > > - Remove pinmux initialization from all drivers. > > - Initialize drivers based on the FDT (instead of functions like > bbb_register_i2c_1(...)) > > - Taking a more detailed look at the FDT what else could be initialized > from it (maybe clocks?) > > It could be a quite nice project for a RTEMS beginner. Due to the > distributed initialization a lot of drivers have to be touched (at least > i2c, spi and pwm). So a potential student would get a nice overview over > the parts. > > Note that this would be a big change for the BSP. Currently the BSP can > be used without an FDT (as far as I know). Only libbsd needs one. After > that a FDT would be mandatory. Despite that, I think that it would be an > improvement. > > Maybe it would be possible to merge the four beagle* BSPs that we have > into only one "beagle" or "am33xx" BSP with that change. That would > allow to support new Beagle variants like the Pocket Beagle without much > effort (most likely only a change in the FDT). > > What do you think? Should I create a ticket for it? >
I love it. Yes please create a ticket. > I think this is a good idea if we can still avoid bloating apps with all > drivers. Make sure it has the right tags and shows up on the project page. The beagle has a lot of RAM. Is this as important for this BSP? > There must be a good diagnostic if the device tree doesn't meet minimum > requirements. We don't want a failure to be hard to figure out. This is a > general statement for all device tree bsps. +1 Chris _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
