From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:38:01 -0600 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] fdt: Enhance dts/Makefile to be all things to all men In-Reply-To: <20130530075644.2724138308E@gemini.denx.de> References: <1369769778-12455-1-git-send-email-sjg@chromium.org> <51A51A50.4050308@wwwdotorg.org> <51A62F8D.9010208@wwwdotorg.org> <20130529213145.698353831A5@gemini.denx.de> <51A67EC1.2000208@wwwdotorg.org> <20130529223621.8B147383069@gemini.denx.de> <51A68A4C.4060505@wwwdotorg.org> <51A6DF7C.30903@wwwdotorg.org> <20130530075644.2724138308E@gemini.denx.de> Message-ID: <51A78E79.3060507@wwwdotorg.org> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 05/30/2013 01:56 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Stephen, > > In message <51A6DF7C.30903@wwwdotorg.org> you wrote: >> >> It seems to be aimed specifically at enabling use of new dtc features >> when present. That seems to be specifically against Wolfgang's goal of >> not requiring new dtc features. There's no point allowing use of new dtc > > Please stop planting statements on me that I did not make. Sorry, but that's what I believe you meant. If you didn't mean that, well then let's clear this up, and the rest of the conversation will be a lot simpler: I believe that for building the *.dts in U-Boot we should simply require the user to have a version of dtc that supports the recently added features such as: * -i directive. * Ability to parse the output of cpp well (e.g. #line directives, emit useful error/warning messages in this case). * Cell expression support. Those are all present in the latest git repo for dtc. If we do that, then we won't need any conditional logic in the U-Boot makefiles. At least parts of Simon's patch won't be necessary. I'm quite happy to achieve this requirement by having the user install that dtc into the $PATH prior to running any U-Boot make, either manually or via distro packages once they're available. It is my understanding that you object to requiring such a new version of dtc, irrespective of the means by which it's provided. If this is not true, then please do let me know; it would vastly simplify matters.