From: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/7] fdt: Build a U-Boot binary without device tree
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 17:42:04 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56A6C0DC.6080406@wwwdotorg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56A6903E.3030700@wwwdotorg.org>
On 01/25/2016 02:14 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 01/25/2016 01:30 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
>> At present u-boot.bin holds the plain U-Boot binary without the device
>> tree.
>> This is somewhat annoying since you need either u-boot.bin or
>> u-boot-dtb.bin
>> depending on whether device tree is used.
>>
>> Adjust the build such that u-boot.bin includes a device tree, and the
>> plain binary is in u-boot-nodtb.bin. For now u-boot-dtb.bin remains the
>> same.
>>
>> This should be acceptable since:
>>
>> - without OF_CONTROL, u-boot.bin still does not include a device tree
>> - with OF_CONTROL, u-boot-dtb.bin does not change
>>
>> The main impact is build systems which are set up to use u-boot.bin as
>> the output file and then add a device tree. These will have to change
>> to use
>> u-boot-nodtb.bin instead.
>
> That's probably going to annoy somebody. Have you put thought into how
> such a build system could auto-detect which file it should use in order
> to automatically adjust to the different file naming conventions of
> different U-Boot versions or branches? If not, this change will burden
> the operator of any tool or automated system with manually handling the
> difference by branching their own code or processes:-(
>
>> Adjust tegra rules so it continues to produce the correct files.
>
> I don't see anything Tegra-related in this patch. Perhaps patch 1/7 was
> included here in a previous version and the commit description not updated?
>
> Anyway, I think this patch doesn't affect me or Tegra's flashing tools.
> For reference, the tool currently uses the following files:
>
> u-boot
> spl/u-boot-spl
> u-boot-nodtb-tegra.bin
> u-boot.dtb
> u-boot-dtb-tegra.bin
Oh, that list is for ARMv7 targets. For ARMv8 targets, we currently use
the following instead:
u-boot*
u-boot.bin
u-boot.dtb
u-boot-dtb.bin
Preferably those files won't change either, or if they do, there's a
trivial way of determining which set of files is present (e.g. perhaps
we pick up u-boot-nodtb.bin and u-boot-dtb.bin if those two files exist,
else we pick up u-boot.bin and u-boot-dtb.bin?)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-26 0:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-25 20:30 [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/7] fdt: Replace u-boot-dtb.bin with u-boot.bin Simon Glass
2016-01-25 20:30 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/7] tegra: Drop generation of -nodtb file with OF_CONTROL Simon Glass
2016-01-25 21:08 ` Stephen Warren
2016-01-25 21:18 ` Simon Glass
2016-01-25 21:26 ` Stephen Warren
2016-01-25 22:01 ` Simon Glass
2016-01-25 20:30 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/7] fdt: Build a U-Boot binary without device tree Simon Glass
2016-01-25 21:14 ` Stephen Warren
2016-01-25 21:18 ` Simon Glass
2016-01-26 0:42 ` Stephen Warren [this message]
2016-01-29 3:06 ` Simon Glass
2016-01-25 20:30 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/7] fdt: Build an SPL " Simon Glass
2016-01-25 20:30 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 4/7] tegra: Always build a boot image with the same filename Simon Glass
2016-01-25 21:20 ` Stephen Warren
2016-01-25 21:24 ` Simon Glass
2016-01-25 20:30 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 5/7] socfpga: Simplify Makefile filenames Simon Glass
2016-01-25 20:43 ` Marek Vasut
2016-01-25 21:18 ` Simon Glass
2016-01-25 20:30 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 6/7] Makefile: Make u-boot.img the same as u-boot-dtb.img Simon Glass
2016-01-25 20:30 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 7/7] Makefile: Drop unnecessary -dtb suffixes Simon Glass
2016-01-25 21:57 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/7] fdt: Replace u-boot-dtb.bin with u-boot.bin Otavio Salvador
2016-01-25 22:01 ` Simon Glass
2016-01-28 3:58 ` Simon Glass
2016-01-28 8:25 ` Hans de Goede
2016-01-29 0:18 ` Simon Glass
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56A6C0DC.6080406@wwwdotorg.org \
--to=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox