From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 16:39:25 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot] Building two different "SPL" for the same board? In-Reply-To: <1369299219.20995.14.camel@localhost> References: <1368813967.3925.23.camel@localhost> <20130517181719.GW32163@bill-the-cat> <1368824185.12475.13.camel@localhost> <20130522152653.GF10368@bill-the-cat> <1369299219.20995.14.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <20130523203925.GD17119@bill-the-cat> 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, May 23, 2013 at 10:53:39AM +0200, Henrik Nordstr?m wrote: > ons 2013-05-22 klockan 11:26 -0400 skrev Tom Rini: > > > If we can implement it cleanly, this isn't (at the 1000 meter view) all > > that much different than what we do on some PowerPC platforms today > > where everything must fit within a few kilobytes. > > Yes it is quite doable. The pieces I have done should be possible to fit > without too much effort. > > The question is more if these kinds of board initialization only > programs is seen as suitable for having in the u-boot tree. It's not > really an SPL as it does not load anything, but it's 99.9% the same code > as used in u-boot SPL. My rather poor understanding of how some of the Freescale ARM parts do SPL is a lot more like this (whack things about, let ROM load next parts) than the "SPL takes over, loads U-Boot" method. And this is OK, in so far as it gets needed jobs done in the resources available. -- Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: