[RFC/PATCH] powerpc/bootwrapper: Allow user to specify additional default targets

[RFC/PATCH] powerpc/bootwrapper: Allow user to specify additional default targets

[Grant Likely]

From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>

It is inconvenient to add additional default targets to the bootwrapper
Makefile for each new board supported which just needs a different dts
file.  This change allows the defconfig to specify additional build
targets.

Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
---

 arch/powerpc/Kconfig       |   13 +++++++++++++
 arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile |    3 +++
 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
index 3934e26..f09f617 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
@@ -458,6 +458,19 @@ config CMDLINE
 	  some command-line options at build time by entering them here.  In
 	  most cases you will need to specify the root device here.
 
+config EXTRA_TARGETS
+	string "Additional default image types"
+	help
+	  List additional targets to be built by the bootwrapper here (separated
+	  by spaces).  This is useful for targets that depend of device tree
+	  files in the .dts directory.
+
+	  Targets in this list will be build as part of the default build
+	  target, or when the user does a 'make zImage' or a
+	  'make zImage.initrd'.
+
+	  If unsure, leave blank
+
 if !44x || BROKEN
 config ARCH_WANTS_FREEZER_CONTROL
 	def_bool y
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile b/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile
index 1cee2f9..1e38237 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile
+++ b/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile
@@ -270,6 +270,9 @@ ifeq ($(CONFIG_PPC32),y)
 image-$(CONFIG_PPC_PMAC)	+= zImage.coff zImage.miboot
 endif
 
+# Allow extra targets to be added to the defconfig
+image-y	+= $(subst ",,$(CONFIG_EXTRA_TARGETS))
+
 initrd-  := $(patsubst zImage%, zImage.initrd%, $(image-n) $(image-))
 initrd-y := $(patsubst zImage%, zImage.initrd%, \
 		$(patsubst dtbImage%, dtbImage.initrd%, \

Re: [RFC/PATCH] powerpc/bootwrapper: Allow user to specify additional default targets

[Grant Likely]

Anyone had a chance to look at this?  I think this could be used to
eliminate a lot of the platform specific default targets in
arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile by moving them into the defconfigs.  Josh,
Kumar, what are your thoughts?

g.

On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
> From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
>
> It is inconvenient to add additional default targets to the bootwrapper
> Makefile for each new board supported which just needs a different dts
> file.  This change allows the defconfig to specify additional build
> targets.
>
> Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
> ---
>
>  arch/powerpc/Kconfig       |   13 +++++++++++++
>  arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile |    3 +++
>  2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
> index 3934e26..f09f617 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
> @@ -458,6 +458,19 @@ config CMDLINE
>          some command-line options at build time by entering them here.  In
>          most cases you will need to specify the root device here.
>
> +config EXTRA_TARGETS
> +       string "Additional default image types"
> +       help
> +         List additional targets to be built by the bootwrapper here (separated
> +         by spaces).  This is useful for targets that depend of device tree
> +         files in the .dts directory.
> +
> +         Targets in this list will be build as part of the default build
> +         target, or when the user does a 'make zImage' or a
> +         'make zImage.initrd'.
> +
> +         If unsure, leave blank
> +
>  if !44x || BROKEN
>  config ARCH_WANTS_FREEZER_CONTROL
>        def_bool y
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile b/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile
> index 1cee2f9..1e38237 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile
> @@ -270,6 +270,9 @@ ifeq ($(CONFIG_PPC32),y)
>  image-$(CONFIG_PPC_PMAC)       += zImage.coff zImage.miboot
>  endif
>
> +# Allow extra targets to be added to the defconfig
> +image-y        += $(subst ",,$(CONFIG_EXTRA_TARGETS))
> +
>  initrd-  := $(patsubst zImage%, zImage.initrd%, $(image-n) $(image-))
>  initrd-y := $(patsubst zImage%, zImage.initrd%, \
>                $(patsubst dtbImage%, dtbImage.initrd%, \
>
>



-- 
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.

Re: [RFC/PATCH] powerpc/bootwrapper: Allow user to specify additional default targets

[Josh Boyer]

On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 00:51:44 -0600
"Grant Likely" <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:

> Anyone had a chance to look at this?  I think this could be used to
> eliminate a lot of the platform specific default targets in
> arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile by moving them into the defconfigs.  Josh,
> Kumar, what are your thoughts?

So for cases like Kilauea/Haleakala or Bamboo/Yosemite, you would
specify Yosemite in the bamboo defconfig?  Or?

I actually sort of prefer having a separate defconfig/CONFIG_YOSEMITE
(as an example) because it's much easier for an end user to figure out
if the board is supported or not.

I could be totally misunderstanding the intention of this patch though,
so I'll stop rambling and wait to see what the use case is.

josh

Re: [RFC/PATCH] powerpc/bootwrapper: Allow user to specify additional default targets

[Grant Likely]

On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 7:18 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 00:51:44 -0600
> "Grant Likely" <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
>
>> Anyone had a chance to look at this?  I think this could be used to
>> eliminate a lot of the platform specific default targets in
>> arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile by moving them into the defconfigs.  Josh,
>> Kumar, what are your thoughts?
>
> So for cases like Kilauea/Haleakala or Bamboo/Yosemite, you would
> specify Yosemite in the bamboo defconfig?  Or?

If they share a defconfig, then yes, that is what I'm thinking about...

> I actually sort of prefer having a separate defconfig/CONFIG_YOSEMITE
> (as an example) because it's much easier for an end user to figure out
> if the board is supported or not.

...however, these don't have to disappear if you prefer them.

> I could be totally misunderstanding the intention of this patch though,
> so I'll stop rambling and wait to see what the use case is.

Specifically the case I'm thinking of is when a user of a Xilinx FPGA
drops a new .dts file into arch/powerpc/boot/dts (say
'super-sexy-platform.dts').  However, instead of modifying the
Makefile or always typing 'make simpleImage.super-sexy-platform', then
can add 'simpleImage.super-sexy-platform' to their defconfig which I
can see being easier for someone to get their head around.

g.

-- 
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.

Re: [RFC/PATCH] powerpc/bootwrapper: Allow user to specify additional default targets

[Josh Boyer]

On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 07:34:23 -0600
"Grant Likely" <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 7:18 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 00:51:44 -0600
> > "Grant Likely" <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> Anyone had a chance to look at this?  I think this could be used to
> >> eliminate a lot of the platform specific default targets in
> >> arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile by moving them into the defconfigs.  Josh,
> >> Kumar, what are your thoughts?
> >
> > So for cases like Kilauea/Haleakala or Bamboo/Yosemite, you would
> > specify Yosemite in the bamboo defconfig?  Or?
> 
> If they share a defconfig, then yes, that is what I'm thinking about...
> 
> > I actually sort of prefer having a separate defconfig/CONFIG_YOSEMITE
> > (as an example) because it's much easier for an end user to figure out
> > if the board is supported or not.
> 
> ...however, these don't have to disappear if you prefer them.

Right.

> > I could be totally misunderstanding the intention of this patch though,
> > so I'll stop rambling and wait to see what the use case is.
> 
> Specifically the case I'm thinking of is when a user of a Xilinx FPGA
> drops a new .dts file into arch/powerpc/boot/dts (say
> 'super-sexy-platform.dts').  However, instead of modifying the
> Makefile or always typing 'make simpleImage.super-sexy-platform', then
> can add 'simpleImage.super-sexy-platform' to their defconfig which I
> can see being easier for someone to get their head around.

Yeah, I thought about the Virtex case with the differing bitstreams
after I sent out my original question.  For purposes like that, this
seems like a great fit.  For truly discrete boards, I prefer discrete
defconfigs.

So overall I see value in the patch.  If nobody else has objections,
then it's fine with me.

josh

Re: [RFC/PATCH] powerpc/bootwrapper: Allow user to specify additional default targets

[Grant Likely]

On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 8:07 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 07:34:23 -0600 Grant Likely wrote:
>> Specifically the case I'm thinking of is when a user of a Xilinx FPGA
>> drops a new .dts file into arch/powerpc/boot/dts (say
>> 'super-sexy-platform.dts').  However, instead of modifying the
>> Makefile or always typing 'make simpleImage.super-sexy-platform', then
>> can add 'simpleImage.super-sexy-platform' to their defconfig which I
>> can see being easier for someone to get their head around.
>
> Yeah, I thought about the Virtex case with the differing bitstreams
> after I sent out my original question.  For purposes like that, this
> seems like a great fit.  For truly discrete boards, I prefer discrete
> defconfigs.
>
> So overall I see value in the patch.  If nobody else has objections,
> then it's fine with me.

so.... can I have an ack?  :-)

g.

-- 
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.

Re: [RFC/PATCH] powerpc/bootwrapper: Allow user to specify additional default targets

[Josh Boyer]

On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 08:29:47 -0600
"Grant Likely" <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 8:07 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 07:34:23 -0600 Grant Likely wrote:
> >> Specifically the case I'm thinking of is when a user of a Xilinx FPGA
> >> drops a new .dts file into arch/powerpc/boot/dts (say
> >> 'super-sexy-platform.dts').  However, instead of modifying the
> >> Makefile or always typing 'make simpleImage.super-sexy-platform', then
> >> can add 'simpleImage.super-sexy-platform' to their defconfig which I
> >> can see being easier for someone to get their head around.
> >
> > Yeah, I thought about the Virtex case with the differing bitstreams
> > after I sent out my original question.  For purposes like that, this
> > seems like a great fit.  For truly discrete boards, I prefer discrete
> > defconfigs.
> >
> > So overall I see value in the patch.  If nobody else has objections,
> > then it's fine with me.
> 
> so.... can I have an ack?  :-)

Oops, sorry.  Of course.

Acked-by: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

josh