From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jerry Van Baren Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 14:31:11 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] Imminent u-boot-fdt pull request In-Reply-To: <46572826.4090307@freescale.com> References: <46526C2E.3070100@gmail.com> <20070524222612.381a3587.kim.phillips@freescale.com> <4656AC13.2010300@grandegger.com> <20070525105833.3d1dbd0e.kim.phillips@freescale.com> <4657152D.7030606@smiths-aerospace.com> <4657255C.8040405@freescale.com> <465727AA.3040104@smiths-aerospace.com> <46572826.4090307@freescale.com> Message-ID: <46572B6F.3050409@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 Scott Wood wrote: > Jerry Van Baren wrote: >>> What about doing a search for device_type = "cpu", rather than >>> looking for a specific CPU name? The Linux bootwrapper does it this >>> way. It also has the benefit of working when there's more than one CPU. >>> >>> -Scott >> >> >> I deeply regret the confusion I caused by pushing the "Send" when I >> meant to push "Write" to start a new, unrelated, message. My updated >> re-send, as you probably have figured out by now, is more coherent. >> >> OF_CPU is defined in the board-specific header file, e.g. >> configs/MPC8360EMDS.h, pulled in by config.h. Since I am missing the >> #include in the two files being discussed, OF_CPU is >> undefined and the string concatenation trick makes it silently disappear. > > Sure... I was just suggesting a more robust method, that doesn't rely on > the board config file to define the CPU name. > > -Scott Ah, now I follow. That is worth considering. That would make some assumptions too, just different ones. Of the top of my head... * All CPUs are clocked the same (unlikely to be a problem) * That the CPU actually _needs_ the fixups (currently they all get the fixup so it isn't currently a problem) As long as it works for the bootwrapper, it would work for u-boot. The two are imperfect subsets of each other, however. Thanks, gvb