Re: [PATCH: dtc take 2] Assemble the blob in memory before writing it out.

[Jon Loeliger <jdl@freescale.com>]

On Wed, 2007-04-18 at 20:59, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
> This makes padding out the blob if the user requested extra size much
> easer.  The assembly and writing to the file is more straight forward too.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gerald Van Baren <vanbaren@cideas.com>
> ---
> 
> Hi David, Jon,
> 
> I wasn't happy with David's suggestion on the -S handling.  I also wasn't
> all that wild about how the blob was assembled and then written to the
> file piecemeal with "ad-hoc" alignment padding.  I realized I could fix
> both by assembling the blob in memory as a "struct data" and then write
> the whole thing out in one fell swoop.
> 
> Makes it a lot simpler and cleaner to my eyes.
> 
> Hope y'all agree,
> gvb

Jerry and David,

Sorry.  I've been out sick for a couple days here and am
just now catching up.  I've read through the last week's
worth of mail here now, so let me see if I have properly
summarized where things stand and what's needed for the DTC:

These patches need to be applied:

    [PATCH dtc] Add -o <output file> to the usage message.
    Sat, 14 Apr 2007 18:16:47 -0400

    [PATCH dtc take 3] Fix reserve map output for asm format.
    Tue, 17 Apr 2007 18:14:41 -0400

    [PATCH: dtc take 2] Assemble the blob in memory before writing it out.
    Wed, 18 Apr 2007 21:59:51 -0400

The last patch there replaces the "Improve -S handling" patches.
But does the last patch replace or depend on the second one?

And I agree with David that last patch is a better approach.

Thanks,
jdl