On 9/8/23 12:03 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
On 10:59-20230908, Andrew Davis wrote:
On 9/8/23 9:42 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
On 16:35-20230908, Apurva Nandan wrote:
From: Dasnavis Sabiya <sabiy...@ti.com>
The board name is programmed in the EEPROM. Add support for board
detection and choose the right dtb based on the board name read
from EEPROM.
The J784S4/AM69 has two platforms naming J784S4-EVM and AM69-SK. The
J784S4 has EEPROM populated at 0x50. AM69 SK has EEPROM
populated at next address 0x51. So start looking for TI specific EEPROM
at 0x50, if not found look for EEPROM at 0x51.
Also, add support for setup_serial() to read the serial number from EEPROM
and update the serial environment variable with the same.
Signed-off-by: Dasnavis Sabiya <sabiy...@ti.com>
Signed-off-by: Apurva Nandan <a-nan...@ti.com>
NAK. go with the approach similar to AM62x. AM69-SK has it's own
fragment.
NAK to your NAK, there is no reason to introduce more fragments here
when both boards can be supported with one defconfig.
Sorry, but no. the evm.c has become a mess. Time to stop it is in the
introduction itself
Need the eeprom stuff clearly pulled out of evm.c -> evm.c should still
work with CONFIG_EEPROM_DETECT disabled and should be board independent.
Sure evm.c is a mess, but that is the price for one config/build working
on multiple boards. That is why we have EEPROM on *every* EVM, you throw
that away if you got to "just have a different config/build for each EVM".
Honestly I'm fine either way (I never did think we got much out of
multi-board detection support), but that decision should come with more
reasoning than "NAK"..
Andrew
