linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 1/4] MIPS: BCM47XX: add Belkin F7Dxxxx board detection

To: Cody P Schafer <devel@codyps.com>, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] MIPS: BCM47XX: add Belkin F7Dxxxx board detection
From: Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@hauke-m.de>
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2014 23:47:15 +0100
Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>, blogic@openwrt.org, "linux-mips@linux-mips.org" <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
In-reply-to: <CAPoQQ-35pFjDq7j_nLPQdCrKnibcaQCha9a5XbVJxv9UQvsW_w@mail.gmail.com>
List-archive: <http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/>
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?Subject=help>
List-id: linux-mips <linux-mips.eddie.linux-mips.org>
List-owner: <mailto:ralf@linux-mips.org>
List-post: <mailto:linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=subscribe%20linux-mips>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=unsubscribe%20linux-mips>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <1388687138-8107-1-git-send-email-hauke@hauke-m.de> <CACna6rw1_QXXk0g9tpWVsx5G1zbNQdun5edHkSzkabVfLuxL4A@mail.gmail.com> <CAPoQQ-35pFjDq7j_nLPQdCrKnibcaQCha9a5XbVJxv9UQvsW_w@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
On 01/02/2014 11:03 PM, Cody P Schafer wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2014/1/2 Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@hauke-m.de>:
>>> From: Cody P Schafer <devel@codyps.com>
>>>
>>> Add a few Belkin F7Dxxxx entries, with F7D4401 sourced from online
>>> documentation and the "F7D7302" being observed. F7D3301, F7D3302, and
>>> F7D4302 are reasonable guesses which are unlikely to cause
>>> mis-detection.
>>>
>>> It also appears that at least the F7D3302, F7D3301, F7D7301, and F7D7302
>>> have a shared boardtype and boardrev, so use that as a fallback to a
>>> "generic" F7Dxxxx board.
>>
>> Cody, Hauke: I'm starring at this patch for 10 minutes now and it's
>> still unclear for me.
>>
>> You say 3301, 3302, 7301 and 7302 have the same board_* entries
>> stating they can be treated with a generic ID entry.
> 
> I included the generic BCM47XX_BOARD_BELKIN_F7DXXXX entry to catch
> those boards that we don't yet have specific entries for. It allows us
> to get the leds and buttons working mostly correctly.
> 
> The specific names are included so that one can determine a more exact
> board. The stock CFE requires different images for different boards
> even though they are very similar. Hardware variations are simply
> gigabit vs 100MB switches, usb port population, led population, and
> 5Ghz radio population (none of which truly require the greater detail
> in board type).
> 
>> At the same time
>> you define BELKIN_F7D3301 and BELKIN_F7D3302... so they are not
>> identical after all?
> 
> [rehash of above] They have the same boardtype & boardrev, but
> (unfortunately) have different image requirements from the stock CFE.
> 
>> Finally what about 4302? I can see it's untested,
>> but for some reason you assign it to the separated enum entry. Is this
>> not going to share config with the generic ones?
> 
> Sorry, I've had this patch go though a couple revisions (adding more
> boards), and not all of them made it into the patch description. (4302
> is just another variation on the generic f7dxxxx board).
> 
>> Sorry, but it looks really messy to me.
> 
> We can thank Belkin for that (see CFE issues mentioned above that
> cause us to want these more specific BCM47XX_BOARD_* macros).
> 
> 
> As an alternate to exposing the specific board names via this
> interface, we (openwrt) could use the nvram userspace tool to look for
> the specific type (the kernel really only needs the generic one,
> unless we want to give a more accurate picture of which LEDs are
> populated). Hauke - thoughts?
> 

If it is possible to detect the specific board I would go with that. At
least when the led configuration is different we have to do different
things for the different boards. In the current way it does not take a
lot of memory to add a new board to the detect code just some bytes  <
50 in init ram. I would remove the generic entry now and leave the
others in, if someone has a different board we can add it.

Hauke

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>