Re: About customizing the image_types_fsl class

[Daiane Angolini <daiane.angolini@freescale.com>]

On 20-01-2014 12:41, Carlos Rafael Giani wrote:
> On 2014-01-20 15:12, Daiane Angolini wrote:
>> I think the question here is how "standard" will SPL be for imx. How
>> many boards has already SPL support *now*?
>>
>> I think it's something we need to start including, because it's the
>> next standard, however, we must make both working in parallel (spl and
>> non-spl).
>>
>> And, I would say, it's better to include the additional source code
>> for SPL support directly to image_types_fsl instead of derivative it
>> only on meta-fsl-arm-extra
>
> True. If more boards start using SPL, then it should become part of the
> image_types_fsl class. Also, a flag to disable writing the uImage
> outside of the partitions would also be useful (but not essential).
>
>>
>> Overall I choose u-boot mainline always. It is our default bootloader,
>> at least in general lines.
>>
>> The u-boot mainline hummingboard stability can be known with simple
>> test. And any additional support may be included. It's only a matter
>> of planing.
>>
>> 2014.01 is about to be released, and u-boot-fslc is about to be update
>> to that version. And we may thing about backport any accepted patch to
>> 2014.01 if it's planned only to 2014.04.
>>
>> Conclusion: I think the best is u-boot mainline, even if it need some
>> rework, it's the best long-term option, in my point of view.
>
> This means I should wait until 2014.01 is released and added to oe-core
> before I submit my cubox-i patches for meta-fsl-arm-extra ?
>

As I know it's supposed to be released today/tomorrow




-- 
Daiane