From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from phobos.denx.de (phobos.denx.de [85.214.62.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE7EFC636CD for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 12:47:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9BEE85780; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 13:47:30 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=collabora.com Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b="fMDLt9iP"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by phobos.denx.de (Postfix, from userid 109) id 280F285811; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 13:47:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from madras.collabora.co.uk (madras.collabora.co.uk [46.235.227.172]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 794CC8576D for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 13:47:26 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=collabora.com Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=eugen.hristev@collabora.com Received: from [192.168.0.125] (unknown [82.76.24.202]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ehristev) by madras.collabora.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B6A4766020E1; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 12:47:25 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=collabora.com; s=mail; t=1676033246; bh=TjbmwCnRFW0iVwWl7p+GXLWJq1HXdZq1+Uz228Ji6TA=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=fMDLt9iPJrLldqrqnvB4qYrTPlgllP17AP3Q2ZTyBJvlpwTCSoevtQ9/L8c+QlIIh xfDYKx08OCCAGJMXAaLyTwS1q8M0Q4m6UpHsu6Atn3ImV19UQHV0VP5YUBxzg67fmx mHMvEHDbYL+gKLVhQjPCmY3rnXTyRn+GSvrv0m0dzqkyI+Nqwm//olNC5WpnXG8dCq OeC74N671Dz1vSIldIRbz+IKlHXXrLRDm/sHiRxxzad47qNOqhVLKpLhciphHipmUS AI66kSHbWVd8e4KMBbJxStGMkV9P2VpM9HDWG7z3rJPGruTrMHMLDuXCbG4jvrslme sFNbyw6FE4P5A== Message-ID: Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2023 14:47:22 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.2 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 031/169] Correct SPL use of ATMEL_PIO4 Content-Language: en-US To: Tom Rini Cc: Simon Glass , U-Boot Mailing List References: <20230205223836.231657-1-sjg@chromium.org> <20230205223836.231657-32-sjg@chromium.org> <2b2c05a3-2886-e82b-af8f-6f75c84400b3@collabora.com> From: Eugen Hristev In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: u-boot@lists.denx.de X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: U-Boot discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Sender: "U-Boot" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.103.6 at phobos.denx.de X-Virus-Status: Clean On 2/10/23 14:41, Tom Rini wrote: > On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 09:25:22AM +0200, Eugen Hristev wrote: >> On 2/9/23 19:36, Tom Rini wrote: >>> On Sun, Feb 05, 2023 at 03:36:17PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: >>> >>>> This converts 1 usage of this option to the non-SPL form, since there is >>>> no SPL_ATMEL_PIO4 defined in Kconfig >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass >>>> --- >>>> >>>> (no changes since v1) >>>> >>>> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91-pio4.c | 2 +- >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91-pio4.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91-pio4.c >>>> index 50e3dd449ab..84b398619c4 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91-pio4.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91-pio4.c >>>> @@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ static int atmel_pinctrl_bind(struct udevice *dev) >>>> ofnode node = dev_ofnode(dev); >>>> struct atmel_pinctrl_data *priv = (struct atmel_pinctrl_data *)dev_get_driver_data(dev); >>>> - if (!CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(ATMEL_PIO4)) >>>> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ATMEL_PIO4)) >>>> return 0; >>>> /* Obtain a handle to the GPIO driver */ >>> >>> This grows SPL in a number of platforms, so adding in Eugen to see if we >>> really do want to omit this here in SPL on platforms that otherwise set >>> the symbol. >>> >> >> Hi Simon, Tom, >> >> The growth is because the compiler will now include in SPL all the code >> below the check ? The respective code is not conditionally compiled, so I am >> trying to see why the growth. The solution would be to guard all the below >> code in the function (or the whole bind itself) by #ifndef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD >> ? > > Correct, Simon's change causes it to be included in SPL and not > optimized out. My question is, are we intentionally omitting the code > here, in that case? Or should we be including it in SPL and Simon's > change of macro is correct. > To give a bit of a background: in Linux, the GPIO and Pinctrl driver are one and the same. In U-boot, as we have two different Uclasses, there are two distinct drivers. However to keep the bindings match, only one of the drivers is instantiated through the devicetree. This driver will instantiate the second. However there is a possible case where the other driver is not selected in defconfig, hence this check that Simon is changing. If we use DT in SPL, and we need the other driver , and not use the non-DM variant, then I say that the code is required in SPL. The problem with most at91 processors is that the SPL is already too large to fit in the internal SRAM. So unless there is a lot of investment to make it smaller, SPL will no longer work anyway for at91. But I guess that if we want to have DM and both pinctrl+gpio drivers in SPL, Simon's change is correct. Without it, the bind for the gpio driver will no longer happen in SPL. Reviewed-by: Eugen Hristev