[U-Boot] [PATCH] Separate EBV Socrates board from Altera Cyclone 5 board

Dinh Nguyen
2013-11-13T00:07:36Z

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Michal Simek <monstr@monstr.eu> wrote:

> On 11/12/2013 03:46 PM, Chin Liang See wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 11:17 +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> >> On 11/12/2013 10:56 AM, Detlev Zundel wrote:
> >>> Hi Michal,
> >>>
> >>>> On 11/11/2013 09:33 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> >>>>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 08:26:02PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Altera Cyclone 5 board is very different board (big, rectangular,
> >>>>>> expensive) than EBV Socrates (small, circular, cheap) board.
> Different
> >>>>>> parts are used there, too, but same configuration of u-boot works on
> >>>>>> both. Nevertheless, printing wrong name confuses users.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Therefore this splits the configuration so that u-boot knows they
> are
> >>>>>> different. So far it is only used for correcting the puts, but there
> >>>>>> may be other uses in future.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@denx.de>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Is there any way at run time to tell which board we are on?
> >>>>
> >>>> Why do you care about board name in general?
> >>>
> >>> We care for board names for a very long time in U-Boot and I'd like to
> >>> keep this. I actually expect a sensible board name on any platform
> that
> >>> I touch. The board name is an important extra information additional
> to
> >>> the SoC name. So the question is the other way round - since when do
> we
> >>> _not_ care about board names?
> >>
> >> There could be i2c memory on board where you can find out this
> information but that's
> >> problematic if it is empty or you want to use this i2c for something
> else.
> >> For all microblaze boards I use XILINX_BOARD_NAME which reflects hw
> design
> >> (if user is smart enough board name is the part of hw design name).
> >> For zynq/socfpga sensible solution is probably to load this name for
> DTS.
> >>
> >
> > Currently, the SOCFPGA SPL is customized through a set of handoff files
> > which located at board folders. These handoff files are generated by
> > tools based on board and user design in FPGA. With that, not much
> > decision being made during run time based on the board. With this
> > handoff and tools approach, it will shield off the complexity of
> > hardware configuration and errors (if user change it manually without
> > tools help). Thanks
>
> Which nice copy of our approach. :-)
>

Ugh...that came from you guys? I can't stand that approach. Coming from
the i.MX world, this
makes the end user so reliant on proprietary tools.

Dinh

> But anyway I believe that you are also generating one macro which define
> name of this configuration based on hw design/board you are using.
> And then you can use this macro for showing board/design name in u-boot.
>
> Thanks,
> Michal
>
> --
> Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng), OpenPGP -> KeyID: FE3D1F91
> w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854
> Maintainer of Linux kernel - Microblaze cpu - http://www.monstr.eu/fdt/
> Maintainer of Linux kernel - Xilinx Zynq ARM architecture
> Microblaze U-BOOT custodian and responsible for u-boot arm zynq platform
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> U-Boot mailing list
> U-Boot at lists.denx.de
> http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
>
>