From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-ee0-x22d.google.com ([2a00:1450:4013:c00::22d]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1VfT49-0002h5-JO for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Sun, 10 Nov 2013 11:20:33 +0000 Received: by mail-ee0-f45.google.com with SMTP id c4so358264eek.18 for ; Sun, 10 Nov 2013 03:20:07 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1384035254.22589.19.camel@lolumad> From: Rostislav Lisovy Date: Sat, 09 Nov 2013 23:14:14 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20131108084215.GU24559@pengutronix.de> References: <1383662527-8538-1-git-send-email-lisovy@gmail.com> <1383662527-8538-4-git-send-email-lisovy@gmail.com> <20131108084215.GU24559@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ARM: i.mx53: Support for Voipac board. Device definition is read from Devicetree To: Sascha Hauer Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org, pisa@cmp.felk.cvut.cz Hello Sascha; On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 09:42 +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote: > Hi Rostislav, > > On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 03:42:07PM +0100, Rostislav Lisovy wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Rostislav Lisovy > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boards/freescale-mx53-vmx53/env/config b/arch/arm/boards/freescale-mx53-vmx53/env/config > > new file mode 100644 > > index 0000000..3d90172 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/arch/arm/boards/freescale-mx53-vmx53/env/config > > Why not use defenv-2? Ok; I will use it; > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boards/freescale-mx53-vmx53/flash_header.c b/arch/arm/boards/freescale-mx53-vmx53/flash_header.c > > new file mode 100644 > > index 0000000..a6864a6 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/arch/arm/boards/freescale-mx53-vmx53/flash_header.c > > I'm currently generating the flash images for new boards using the > imx-image tool and also generate multi board images. This is a very > flexible, though maybe hard to understand mechanism. Is this the reason > you haven't used it or were you not aware of it? > I would rather see this board taking part in this new mechanism. Are you > willing to port this over? Otherwise I could try and convert this patch, > but I would depend on you testing the result. I was investigating how the imx53-loco support is done, however I was not sure if the 'multiboard' is the preferred way. I found your patchset http://www.spinics.net/lists/u-boot-v2/msg15296.html shortly describing the functionality of the multiboard barebox -- I still do not understand the concept. The final binary has to hold just one particular 'flash_header', thus be able to boot just on one particular board. I do understand the flexibility of the devicetree, however something like the SDRAM configuration can not be chosen 'on the fly' by the PBL? It will save me (and probably others) a lot of time if you could quickly explain the functionality. I do agree the flash-header-imx53-loco.imxcfg looks much cleaner. I will try to write the flash_header for the Voipac board in the same way. Regards; Rostislav _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox