Re: [PATCH 2/3] Add Tegra132 support for the cbootimage utility

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 07/15/2014 06:36 AM, Allen Martin wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 01:56:34PM -0700, Vince Hsu wrote:
Hi,

On 07/12/2014 02:23 AM, Allen Martin wrote:
+cbootimage_soc_config tegra132_config = {
+       .init_bad_block_table           = t132_init_bad_block_table,
+       .set_dev_param                          = t132_set_dev_param,
+       .get_dev_param                          = t132_get_dev_param,
+       .set_sdram_param                        = t132_set_sdram_param,
+       .get_sdram_param                        = t132_get_sdram_param,
+       .setbl_param                            = t132_setbl_param,
+       .getbl_param                            = t132_getbl_param,
+       .set_value                                      = t132_bct_set_value,
+       .get_value                                      = t132_bct_get_value,
+       .set_data                                       = t132_bct_set_data,
+       .get_bct_size                           = t132_get_bct_size,
+       .set_mts_info                           = t132_set_mts_info,
+       .get_mts_info                           = t132_get_mts_info,
+       .token_supported                        = t132_bct_token_supported,
+
+       .devtype_table                          = s_devtype_table_t132,
+       .sdmmc_data_width_table         = s_sdmmc_data_width_table_t132,
+       .spi_clock_source_table         = s_spi_clock_source_table_t132,
+       .nvboot_memory_type_table       = s_nvboot_memory_type_table_t132,
+       .sdram_field_table                      = s_sdram_field_table_t132,
+       .nand_table                                     = 0,
+       .sdmmc_table                            = s_sdmmc_table_t132,
+       .spiflash_table                         = s_spiflash_table_t132,
+       .device_type_table                      = s_device_type_table_t132,
+};
+
Since Tegra132 and Tegra124 are so similar, can we reuse the Tegra124
version of any of these to avoid the duplication?
Some of these functions like setbl_param refer to the macros/definitions
in nvboot_bct_txx.h. So maybe they look similar, actually they don't. If
we want to generalize these functions, we might have to refactor
nvboot_bct_txx.h and some more stuff. Can we leave it as is?
I can see how this could turn into a can of worms.  I just seems like
a shame to have to duplicate so much code for a new SoC that's ~90% the
same as the previous SoC.  Can the token tables be reused, or do they
have the same issue?
The token table is something like supported feature list. Every SoC from t20 to t132 has only slight differences from others. But keeping a simple table for each SoC might be reasonable here?

Thanks,
Vince

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux ARM MSM]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux