Hi, > -----Original Message----- > From: Marek Vasut <marek.va...@mailbox.org> > Sent: Thursday, 21 August 2025 4:50 pm > To: Maniyam, Dinesh <dinesh.mani...@altera.com>; u-boot@lists.denx.de > Cc: Simon <simon.k.r.goldschm...@gmail.com>; Simon Glass > <s...@chromium.org>; Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com>; Chee, Tien Fong > <tien.fong.c...@altera.com>; Hea, Kok Kiang <kok.kiang....@altera.com>; Ng, > Boon Khai <boon.khai...@altera.com>; Yuslaimi, Alif Zakuan > <alif.zakuan.yusla...@altera.com>; Lim, Jit Loon <jit.loon....@altera.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch: arm: mach-socfpga: misc: improve help text and > usage > examples > > [CAUTION: This email is from outside your organization. Unless you trust the > sender, do not click on links or open attachments as it may be a fraudulent > email > attempting to steal your information and/or compromise your computer.] > > On 8/21/25 5:35 AM, dinesh.mani...@altera.com wrote: > > From: Dinesh Maniyam <dinesh.mani...@altera.com> > > > > The existing 'bridge' command help was incomplete and contained a > > spelling error. This patch updates the help text to clearly describe > > the available bridge bit positions and their corresponding masks: > > The command was primarily written for CV/AV , that's why it was incomplete for > newer SoCs. Instead of the bit handling, why not add support for symbolic name > handling instead ? > > Add 'bridge list' to print supported bridges per SoC. > > Add 'bridge set' which handles bridge=state parameters, e.g. 'bridge set > h2f=1 f2h=0 ...'. That will be future proof and scale.
I get the point, improving the bridges command will help to support newer SoCs. Let me work on it. Thanks Dinesh
