Hi Simon, On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Simon Glass <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Bin, > > On 26 May 2015 at 21:55, Bin Meng <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Simon, >> >> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Simon Glass <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi Bin, >>> >>> On 25 May 2015 at 08:36, Bin Meng <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Although the two qemu-x86 targets (i440fx and q35) share a lot in >>>> common, they still have something that cannot easily handled in one >>>> place (like different configurations, different properties in the >>>> device tree). Split to create two dedicated board configuration and >>>> device tree files and make the i440fx be the default build target. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <[email protected]> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> arch/x86/dts/Makefile | 3 +- >>>> arch/x86/dts/qemu-x86_i440fx.dts | 34 +++++++++++++++ >>>> arch/x86/dts/{qemu-x86.dts => qemu-x86_q35.dts} | 2 +- >>>> board/coreboot/coreboot/Kconfig | 4 +- >>>> board/emulation/qemu-x86/Kconfig | 19 +++++++-- >>>> configs/qemu-x86_defconfig | 1 - >>>> doc/README.x86 | 13 +++++- >>>> include/configs/{qemu-x86.h => qemu-x86_i440fx.h} | 20 ++------- >>>> include/configs/qemu-x86_q35.h | 52 >>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 9 files changed, 122 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) >>>> create mode 100644 arch/x86/dts/qemu-x86_i440fx.dts >>>> rename arch/x86/dts/{qemu-x86.dts => qemu-x86_q35.dts} (95%) >>>> rename include/configs/{qemu-x86.h => qemu-x86_i440fx.h} (78%) >>>> create mode 100644 include/configs/qemu-x86_q35.h >>> >>> Do we need a separate config file? It would be good if all the changes >>> were in the device tree so that we don't need a separate config. Or at >>> least that the configs are the same except for the device tree. >>> >> >> So far the only difference between two separate config files are the >> ATA/SATA settings. i440fx has legacy IDE support while q35 has the >> AHCI support. We can enable them both in just one config files, >> however turning on legacy IDE support on q35 causes significant boot >> delay as the legacy IDE driver has some big timeout in probing the >> attached devices. Do you think this is something we are tolerant of? >> If yes, I can just do separate device trees. > > I think it is OK. But another option would be to add an IDE node to > the device tree and check it when CONFIG_OF_CONTROL is defined... >
I feel that we need convert all block drivers to driver model, so that the driver can probe and initialize IDE/AHCI based on device tree node. But I guess that's a long term goal? Regards, Bin _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
