[U-Boot] [PATCH] tegra: allow build to succeed with SPL disabled

[Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>]

On 11/01/2013 11:29 AM, Vidya Sagar wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Stephen Warren [mailto:swarren at wwwdotorg.org]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 9:59 PM
>> To: Vidya Sagar; u-boot at lists.denx.de
>> Cc: Stephen Warren; Tom Warren
>> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] tegra: allow build to succeed with SPL disabled
>>
>> On 10/31/2013 03:21 AM, Vidya Sagar wrote:
>>> u-boot-dtb-tegra.bin and u-boot-nodtb-tegra.bin binaries are generated
>>> only if the SPL build is enabled as they have dependency on SPL build
>>
>> Should they though? If there's no SPL, surely we still want to generate the
>> same output filenames, so that consumers of the binaries don't have to care
>> whether a particular board needs the SPL tacked onto the binary.
>>
>> In other words, rather than:
>>
>> u-boot-nodtb-tegra.bin == SPL + U-Boot
>> u-boot-dtb-tegra.bin == SPL + U-Boot + DTB
>>
>> ... when SPL is disabled, shouldn't we generate:
>>
>> u-boot-nodtb-tegra.bin == U-Boot
>> u-boot-dtb-tegra.bin == U-Boot + DTB
>>
>> That would require modifying the rules that generate those files not to
>> include the SPL binary in the concatenation, rather than simply not
>> generating those files at all.
> 
> When the SPL build is disabled, we are already generating u-boot.bin and u-boot-dtb.bin.
> Do we really want to generate two more binaries with the same content but with different names ?

Oh, I guess that the way u-boot-tegra-*.bin is a bit different to what I
thought, so indeed if you just disable those, then the desired
U-Boot+DTB files are still created. So, I guess it's fine the way you
have it.

It's a bit annoying that the output filenames are different based on
whether you have SPL or not, but I guess I can make our flasher scripts
cope with that easily enough.