From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dirk Behme Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:07:01 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] RFC common omap3 subconfig ? was Re: [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: Increase bootargs string length. In-Reply-To: References: <1261056567-5214-1-git-send-email-srk@ti.com> <4B2A3F8A.6040105@googlemail.com> <4B2A545E.1000806@windriver.com> Message-ID: <4B2A5725.50909@googlemail.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 17.12.2009 16:58, Premi, Sanjeev wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de >> [mailto:u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Tom >> Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 9:25 PM >> To: Dirk Behme >> Cc: u-boot at lists.denx.de >> Subject: [U-Boot] RFC common omap3 subconfig ? was Re: >> [PATCH] OMAP3EVM: Increase bootargs string length. >> >> Dirk Behme wrote: >>> On 17.12.2009 14:29, Sriramakrishnan wrote: >>>> Increase the bootargs string length as multiple options >>>> (especially for Video settings) are passed to the kernel >>>> through bootargs. Also increase the number of args. >> >> >>> >>> Should we do this for some more OMAP3 boards, too? E.g. Overo and >>> Beagle? Or for all OMAP3 boards? >>> >> >> It seems like a lot of the omap3 boards share common config options. >> What do you think about consolidating the common options to >> a sub config file ? > > Seems a good idea; only if we are sure that the next board doesn't > break the current list of common configs. Else, we would be having > patches to move config options back to board specific files. Does Wolfgang have a basic opinion about sub-configs for configuration stuff common for similar boards? Best regards Dirk