From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thierry Reding Subject: Re: Unifying device tree filenames, and U-Boot SoC name Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 16:22:14 +0200 Message-ID: <20120521142214.GC21513@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de> References: <4FB3E788.2040801@wwwdotorg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="YD3LsXFS42OYHhNZ" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4FB3E788.2040801-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Stephen Warren Cc: Tom Warren , Olof Johansson , Colin Cross , U-Boot Mailing List , "linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Allen Martin , Simon Glass List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org --YD3LsXFS42OYHhNZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable * Stephen Warren wrote: > I just posted a patch which causes U-Boot to define some variables > describing which board you're running on: >=20 > http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2012-May/124556.html >=20 > In particular, see the description of that first patch for motivation > re: U-Boot scripts. >=20 > The one issue here is that the U-Boot SoC name for Tegra20 is tegra2 > (hence it will define board_soc=3Dtegra2), whereas the kernel's device > tree files are all tegra-*.dts not tegra2-*.dts. >=20 > I propose we fix this by: >=20 > a) In the kernel, renaming tegra*-${board}.dts to tegra20-${board}.dts > (or tegra30-${board}.dts). This appears to better match what most other > ARM sub-arches are doing anyway. >=20 > b) In U-Boot, rename the tegra2 support to tegra20 so that U-Boot ends > up setting board_soc=3Dtegra20, so this matches the .dts/.dtb filenames. > This would involve renaming arch/arm/cpu/armv7/tegra2/ to > ./arch/arm/cpu/armv7/tegra20/ and editing boards.cfg to match, and > possibly other related changes. >=20 > This sounds like churn, but I think we could easily fold this into > Allen's series that moves the tegra2 directory in order to put it in a > common place for separate SPL/non-SPL builds to avoid doing this kind of > thing multiple times. >=20 > Does anyone think this is a good/bad/... idea? Thanks. I like it. It's better to have the names consistent. Thierry --YD3LsXFS42OYHhNZ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk+6T5YACgkQZ+BJyKLjJp8GhQCfTU7FscKgkzy4hdvVHc+pGZs4 Fd0AoI86KLsVlv7EzkZ7AxUw1IcX+CbA =fev9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --YD3LsXFS42OYHhNZ-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thierry Reding Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 16:22:14 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] Unifying device tree filenames, and U-Boot SoC name In-Reply-To: <4FB3E788.2040801@wwwdotorg.org> References: <4FB3E788.2040801@wwwdotorg.org> Message-ID: <20120521142214.GC21513@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de * Stephen Warren wrote: > I just posted a patch which causes U-Boot to define some variables > describing which board you're running on: > > http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2012-May/124556.html > > In particular, see the description of that first patch for motivation > re: U-Boot scripts. > > The one issue here is that the U-Boot SoC name for Tegra20 is tegra2 > (hence it will define board_soc=tegra2), whereas the kernel's device > tree files are all tegra-*.dts not tegra2-*.dts. > > I propose we fix this by: > > a) In the kernel, renaming tegra*-${board}.dts to tegra20-${board}.dts > (or tegra30-${board}.dts). This appears to better match what most other > ARM sub-arches are doing anyway. > > b) In U-Boot, rename the tegra2 support to tegra20 so that U-Boot ends > up setting board_soc=tegra20, so this matches the .dts/.dtb filenames. > This would involve renaming arch/arm/cpu/armv7/tegra2/ to > ./arch/arm/cpu/armv7/tegra20/ and editing boards.cfg to match, and > possibly other related changes. > > This sounds like churn, but I think we could easily fold this into > Allen's series that moves the tegra2 directory in order to put it in a > common place for separate SPL/non-SPL builds to avoid doing this kind of > thing multiple times. > > Does anyone think this is a good/bad/... idea? Thanks. I like it. It's better to have the names consistent. Thierry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: not available URL: