From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dalon Westergreen Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:33:52 -0800 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v7 0/7] arm: socfpga: update default u-boot environment In-Reply-To: <12ad365e-bb38-5d4b-d65e-eec8b666be13@denx.de> References: <1485462671-27830-1-git-send-email-dwesterg@gmail.com> <954a2e8c-c28b-9c3d-fe44-ccd40a98375c@denx.de> <1485464715.8012.61.camel@gmail.com> <12ad365e-bb38-5d4b-d65e-eec8b666be13@denx.de> Message-ID: <1485470032.8012.74.camel@gmail.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 22:41 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 01/26/2017 10:05 PM, Dalon Westergreen wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 21:54 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > > > > > > On 01/26/2017 09:31 PM, Dalon Westergreen wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Dalon Westergreen > > > > > > > > These patches update the boot and os partition numbers in > > > > the??????????????????? > > > > default uboot environment for a number of socfpga > > > > boards.??Per?????????????????? > > > > request, common environment configurations have been moved to > > > > a????????????????? > > > > shared > > > > header.????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? > > > > ? > > > > > > > > Changed in v7: > > > > ? Changed the bootloader partition to 3 to match the default layout for > > > > ? socfpga.??commit 61520ac4d5545cc8d2e1792092e46ab8043d5f36 changed this > > > > to > > > > 1 > > > > ? which broke a number of socfpga kits. > > > > > > And this commit will break another bulk of kits, great ... > > I think the only kit that MAY be affected is the DE1 kit and I > > actually dont even think that is true b/c they are probably > > using the method described in the former thread where they just? > > write the u-boot-with-spl.sfp to +64KB.?? > > CONFIG_SPL_ABORT_ON_RAW_IMAGE is defined for the board. > > And all the kits which used the environment in mainline U-Boot. > > > > > If i had a board I would test it.??But that said, this is currently? > > how all of the altera kits, and the de0 kit work. > > I'd be happy to take the previous patchset without this new "windows > compatibility"/"ancient u-boot compatibility" crap and then proceed > with a discussion on this new topic. > > But now that it came up, well, I guess I'll wait for Dinh to make the > decision, since we clearly have totally different opinions. > Thanks. ?I am open to any suggestions, i could just wrap the? boot partition number in socfpga_common with an ifndef? and define? it as partition 3 in the altera boards which currently use that setup? another option would be to re-implement the method used in the older 2013.01.01 uboot used by socfpga which, rather than using a partition number specifically looked for a partition of type 0xa2 making the partition number irrelevant? --dalon