Hi Stefan,
On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 08:11:55AM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote:
> On 29.05.2018 06:45, Baruch Siach wrote:
> > Equivalent code that disables the hidden i2c0 slave already exists in
> > the Turris Omnia platform specific code. But this hidden i2c0 slave that
> > interferes the i2c bus is not board specific. Armada 38x SoCs and at
> > least some Kirkwood variants are affected as well. Add code to disable
> > this slave to the i2c bus driver to make it work on all affected
> > hardware.
> >
> > Use the bind callback because we want this to always run at boot,
> > regardless of whether U-Boot uses the i2c bus.
> >
> > Cc: Rabeeh Khoury <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Chris Packham <[email protected]>
> > Reviewed-by: Stefan Roese <[email protected]>
> > Reviewed-by: Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Baruch Siach <[email protected]>
> > ---
[snip]
> > +static int mvtwsi_i2c_bind(struct udevice *bus)
> > +{
> > + struct mvtwsi_registers *twsi = devfdt_get_addr_ptr(bus);
> > +
> > + /* Disable the hidden slave in i2c0 of these platforms */
> > + if ((IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARMADA_38X) || IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KIRKWOOD))
>
> We could better use the compatible check here:
>
> if (device_is_compatible(dev, "marvell,mv64xxx-i2c"))
This is not an equivalent check. marvell,mv64xxx-i2c covers other SoCs that
might not be affected.
Furthermore, this makes a build time test into a run time one. This bloats the
code for platforms like Allwinner that are unlikely to be affected.
What is the advantage of device_is_compatible()? Is it feasible to build a
multi-platform U-Boot image?
> > + && bus->req_seq == 0)
> > + twsi_disable_i2c_slave(twsi);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
baruch
--
http://baruch.siach.name/blog/ ~. .~ Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
- [email protected] - tel: +972.52.368.4656, http://www.tkos.co.il -
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
