As part of bringing the master branch back in to next, we need to allow
for all of these changes to exist here.
Reported-by: Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>
Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
When bringing in the series 'arm: dts: am62-beagleplay: Fix Beagleplay
Ethernet"' I failed to notice that b4 noticed it was based on next and
so took that as the base commit and merged that part of next to master.
This reverts commit c8ffd1356d, reversing
changes made to 2ee6f3a5f7.
Reported-by: Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>
Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
When U-Boot started using SPDX tags we were among the early adopters and
there weren't a lot of other examples to borrow from. So we picked the
area of the file that usually had a full license text and replaced it
with an appropriate SPDX-License-Identifier: entry. Since then, the
Linux Kernel has adopted SPDX tags and they place it as the very first
line in a file (except where shebangs are used, then it's second line)
and with slightly different comment styles than us.
In part due to community overlap, in part due to better tag visibility
and in part for other minor reasons, switch over to that style.
This commit changes all instances where we have a single declared
license in the tag as both the before and after are identical in tag
contents. There's also a few places where I found we did not have a tag
and have introduced one.
Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
Adjust this code to use driver model for devices where possible. Since
existing users have not been converted the old code must remain.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
We should allow pci config read/write to host bridge (b.d.f = 0.0.0)
in the int1a_handler() which is a valid pci device.
Signed-off-by: Jian Luo <jian.luo4@boschrexroth.de>
Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
These functions currently use a generic name, but they are for x86 only.
This may introduce confusion and prevents U-Boot from using these names
more widely.
In fact it should be possible to remove these at some point and use
generic functions, but for now, rename them.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
On x86 machines we can use an emulator to run option ROMS as with other
architectures. But with some additional effort (mostly due to the 16-bit
nature of option ROMs) we can run them natively. Add support for this.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
