Hi Michal, On Wed, 2017-11-22 at 08:11 +0100, Michal Simek wrote: > Hi, > > On 22.11.2017 04:06, Wilson Lee wrote: > > > > Hi Michal, > > > > On Wed, 2017-11-08 at 07:27 +0100, Michal Simek wrote: > > > > > > On 8.11.2017 03:54, Wilson Lee wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Initial platform creation for NIZYNQ. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Joe Hershberger <joe.hershber...@ni.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Keng Soon Cheah <keng.soon.ch...@ni.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Wilson Lee <wilson....@ni.com> > > > > Cc: Chen Yee Chew <chen.yee.c...@ni.com> > > > > Cc: Albert Aribaud <albert.u.b...@aribaud.net> > > > > --- > > > > arch/arm/Kconfig | 15 +++++++++++++++ > > > > arch/arm/Makefile | 4 +++- > > > > board/ni/Kconfig | 13 +++++++++++++ > > > > 3 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > create mode 100644 board/ni/Kconfig > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig > > > > index 83b7aa5..ae34821 100644 > > > > --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig > > > > +++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig > > > > @@ -767,6 +767,20 @@ config ARCH_ZYNQMP > > > > select DM_USB if USB > > > > imply FAT_WRITE > > > > > > > > +config NIZYNQ > > > > + bool "National Instruments zynq Platform" > > > > + select CPU_V7 > > > > + select SUPPORT_SPL > > > > + select OF_CONTROL > > > > + select SPL_OF_CONTROL if SPL > > > > + select DM > > > > + select DM_ETH > > > > + select DM_GPIO > > > > + select SPL_DM if SPL > > > > + select DM_MMC > > > > + select DM_SERIAL > > > > + select SPL_SEPARATE_BSS if SPL > > > > + > > > What's the reason for this? You should reuse current ZYNQ > > > fragment > > > and > > > if this selects something what you don't want then we should > > > changethat. Look at syzygy or topic boards which are using > > > existing > > > zynq > > > infrastructure. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Michal > > > > > > > > The reason for adding NIZYNQ instead of reuse ARCH_ZYNQ. That is > > because we need NIZYNQ at the same level with ARCH_ZYNQ in > > menuconfig. > > We are thinking that it would be missleading, if our customer need > > to > > select Xilinx Zynq Platform before they can select NI product. > > > > Hence, what we wish to get the menuconfig that look like below, > > > > +------------------------ Target select ------------------------+ > > > > > > Use the arrow keys to navigate this window or press > > > the | > > > hotkey of the item you wish to select followed by the <SPACE | > > > BAR>. Press <?> for additional information about > > > this | > > > +----^(-)---------------------------------------------------+ | > > > > > > > > ( ) Support pcm-052 | > > > > | > > > > ( ) Support BK4r1 | > > > > | > > > |( ) Xilinx Zynq Platform | > > > | > > > > > > > > ( ) Support Xilinx ZynqMP Platform | > > > > | > > > > (X) National Instruments zynq Platform | > > > > | > > > > ( ) NVIDIA Tegra | > > > > | > > > +----+(+)---------------------------------------------------+ | > > +---------------------------------------------------------------+ > > > > > > <Select> < Help > > > > | > > +---------------------------------------------------------------+ > > > I understand that you want to put there a little bit of marketing but > moving to DM should avoid doing this and really I want to make xilinx > ports generic as much as possible. > > What we can do is to change description to be more understandable > like > "Xilinx Zynq based platform".
After some discussion, we think that changing the description to be more understandable as you suggested above is make sense to us and it is a good approache also. May I know, do you will submit a commit to change the description or we might need to submit ourself on changing the description? > > Is there something what will use NIZYNQ symbol in the code? Does that > mean that there is something what is not handle now that you have to > use > this symbol? I think that is alright. Because, we are not using NIZYNQ symbol in the code. Furthermore, we are using our own header file (something like zynq- common.h) due to it will provide more flexibility on defining stuff (such as undefine something that defined in zynq-common, define CONFIG_EXTRA_ENV_SETTINGS, CONFIG_PREBOOT and etc..). I think we can easily change the default header file from zynq-common.h to our own one by redefine "SYS_CONFIG_NAME" again in defconfig. By the way, may I know is it have a better way for not keep on redefining the "SYS_CONFIG_NAME" in every board defconfig if we have 20+ boards. Thanks, Michal. Best Regards, Wilson Lee _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot