From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marek Vasut Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2018 14:30:11 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 66/93] arm: Remove ot1200 board In-Reply-To: <20181122132839.GC11247@bill-the-cat> References: <20181119155413.158098-1-sjg@chromium.org> <20181119155413.158098-67-sjg@chromium.org> <20181122125249.GA11247@bill-the-cat> <20181122132839.GC11247@bill-the-cat> Message-ID: <69a3b0f4-1b49-8802-db7f-c1a3ff97fff2@gmail.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 11/22/2018 02:28 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 02:24:49PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: >> On 11/22/2018 01:52 PM, Tom Rini wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 10:25:14AM +0100, Christian Gmeiner wrote: >>> >>>> Am Mo., 19. Nov. 2018 um 16:56 Uhr schrieb Simon Glass : >>>>> >>>>> This board has not been converted to CONFIG_DM_BLK by the deadline. >>>>> Remove it. >>>>> >>>> >>>> As the board is still mainted I will NAK it for the moment. Are there >>>> any hints want needs to be done >>>> to port thie board over to new DM stuff? >>> >>> Yes, as a start you need to switch over to using CONFIG_OF_CONTROL and >>> selecting/providing a dtb file. I see ot1200 is using DWC_AHSATA which >>> needs more work, but this is the board-level work that needs doing. >> >> Wasn't there a possibility to use platform data in board file instead of >> DT ? Or is DT mandatory now , including the libfdt overhead ? > > In short, DT for U-Boot and platform data for SPL is what's recommended, > yes. If the board is limited, can it use only platdata ? Some platforms don't even have DT support at all. -- Best regards, Marek Vasut