From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jerry Van Baren Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2007 14:12:58 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] Warning for mpc8360emds users: fdt-cmd from u-boot-fdt.git In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46153C2A.3050206@smiths-aerospace.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Bruce_Leonard at selinc.com wrote: > Hi all > > u-boot-users-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net wrote on 04/05/2007 04:00:15 > AM: > >> Wolfgang Denk wrote: >>> In message <46146842.8060509@gmail.com> you wrote: >>>> If bootm edits/augments the FDT, the boot scripts/user has no chance > to >>>> change the items it edits/augments (biggie: the chosen node), or even > >>>> print it before linux is launched. This defeats 90% of the purpose > of >>>> the fdt command - allowing the user/script customize the blob before >>>> linux is launched. >>> I agree that it should be *possible* to do this, if wanted.Similar >>> like we can set up our own contents of thebootargs variable. >>> >>> On the other hand, bootm should do everything that is necessary to >>> start a kernel without such interaction, if needed. >>> > > > My two cents worth (for what it's worth :-/): from the standpoint of > someone using uboot for the first time and having to learn from the ground > up without the benefit of having used this stuff for many years, I agree > with Wolfgang. It took me two weeks just to figure out what a device tree > is and that I even needed one. It took me two more days to figure out how > to create the blob and how to use it. I still don't know the details of > DTS files, what needs to be in them or what the different fields mean. > Adding another step/level of obscurity with REQUIRING the use of fdt > commands and/or scripts is just another barrier to new users. And I have > to tell you, this thing is a bear to learn. For folks who have been > digging around in the guts of it, I'm sure it's trivial. But I at least > am pretty overwhelmed by it. > > I think it would be great to have the option of using the ftd commands if > it suited your purpose, but still be able to use things as they currently > are. That would be the most flexible, give the expert users something > they want, and not add yet another thing that new people HAVE to learn > just to get an OS to boot. > > Again just my 2 cents. Flames welcome. > > Bruce Yes, but now you are worth 5 figures more: expect a $00,000 raise as part of your next performance appraisal. I plan to implement Andy Fleming's suggestion which will resolve the issue: > > What if we made it so if there isn't a chosen node in the blob when > > bootm is called, it fills in a default one. This prevents some odd > > failures, and allows people to continue using device trees in the > > current manner, while still enabling the extra flexibility. gvb Pedantic Script: device trees and blobs are kernel things, they ain't our fault. :-P Yet. ;-)