From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 10:40:15 -0500 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v1 1/1] fastboot: Add support for flashing zImage In-Reply-To: References: <1424904981-12339-1-git-send-email-dileep.katta@linaro.org> Message-ID: <20150302154015.GU29891@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 Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 06:30:30PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Dileep Katta wrote: > > This patch adds support to flash zImage to the boot partition on eMMC. > > Usage: fastboot flash zImage > > So this replaces the kernel in an existing bootimage. What's wrong > with "fastboot flash boot", "fastboot flash:raw boot " or > "fastboot boot "? It is a bit fragile to be updating your > kernel without updating the ramdisk. arm64 has no zImage, so this > command is somewhat arm32 specific. > > Fastboot is already plagued with a variety of implementations and > behaviors. Some unification here would be good and just adding > whatever various commands have been added to vendor u-boot's is not > going to help. Adding to the combinations of things to test also > bothers me. +1. Just how much room do we have, or not have, to be compatible with existing tools but also abstract some of this out so that different boards can "I want a layout like this ..." (one set of kernel, device tree, initrd) and another "I want a layout like this ..." (two sets, for redundancy). -- Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: