From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com (Thomas Petazzoni) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 10:10:30 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: atags: add support for Marvell's u-boot In-Reply-To: References: <1370277937-2965-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <20130603171017.GN18614@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20130603175629.GH5008@1wt.eu> <20130603181437.GO3803@titan.lakedaemon.net> <20130603183057.GA9868@1wt.eu> <20130603184148.GQ3803@titan.lakedaemon.net> Message-ID: <20130604101030.232b3743@skate> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Dear Nicolas Pitre, On Mon, 03 Jun 2013 15:07:45 -0400 (EDT), Nicolas Pitre wrote: > Isn't upstream U-Boot supporting Marvell devices properly these days? No, upstream U-Boot has no support for Armada 370 and Armada XP. Sebastian and I have started adding support for Armada 370 and Armada XP in Barebox, but it's gonna take a while before it has enough features to be practically useful. And as Jason said, even though Armada 370 and Armada XP have a working UART-based recovery method, users are also scared of doing bootloader updates, and on some consumer products, the UART is not necessarily easily available to the average users (may need some soldering skills, a level-shifter to use the TTL UART of the board, etc.). Practically, even on platforms such as Kirkwood that do have upstream U-Boot support, I believe the vast majority of people are still running the original U-Boot, even though they decided to use an upstream kernel by installing for example Debian on their NAS. So the use case of a mainline kernel on a Marvell-specific U-Boot should be supported is pretty common. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com