From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Cousson, Benoit" Subject: Re: Trying to boot Panda with DT Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:27:33 +0100 Message-ID: <4EE752C5.50804@ti.com> References: <1323781385.1877.75.camel@deskari> <4EE7512C.6010207@ti.com> <4EE75260.3070700@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bear.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.41]:48996 "EHLO bear.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751539Ab1LMN1g (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2011 08:27:36 -0500 Received: from dlep34.itg.ti.com ([157.170.170.115]) by bear.ext.ti.com (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id pBDDRZvA019972 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 07:27:36 -0600 Received: from dlep26.itg.ti.com (smtp-le.itg.ti.com [157.170.170.27]) by dlep34.itg.ti.com (8.13.7/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pBDDRZar006375 for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 07:27:35 -0600 (CST) Received: from DFLE71.ent.ti.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dlep26.itg.ti.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pBDDRZS2000561 for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 07:27:35 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <4EE75260.3070700@ti.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Rajendra Nayak Cc: Tomi Valkeinen , linux-omap mailing list On 12/13/2011 2:25 PM, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > On Tuesday 13 December 2011 06:50 PM, Cousson, Benoit wrote: >> >> I've just sent a patch to add the default DT config for OMAP. It will >> add these config into the OMAP2plus Kconfig. >> >> + select USE_OF >> + select ARM_APPENDED_DTB >> + select ARM_ATAG_DTB_COMPAT >> + select PROC_DEVICETREE >> >> In theory ARM_APPENDED_DTB and ARM_ATAG_DTB_COMPAT should not be needed >> in your case but only for legacy u-boot. >> It should not messed up the DT in case of DT aware uboot, but it worst >> checking if this is the case. > > I don't think thats a problem as I have those options enabled and am > able to boot with the DT aware uboot. OK cool, I was not sure but that's much better... Let's assume that this is due to a broken u-boot then :-) Thanks, Benoit