From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-ua0-x243.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400c:c08::243]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.85_2 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1baIIA-00072C-O9 for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 08:03:11 +0000 Received: by mail-ua0-x243.google.com with SMTP id u13so2314536uau.0 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 01:02:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160818063059.GD20657@pengutronix.de> References: <20160818063059.GD20657@pengutronix.de> From: Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 10:02:48 +0200 Message-ID: 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: Fwd: Shouldn't boot_board be called from boot instead of init? To: Sascha Hauer Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org Hello, 2016-08-18 8:31 GMT+02:00 Sascha Hauer : > Hi, > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:42:32AM +0200, Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> Currently, for defaultenv v1, the /env/bin/boot_board script is called >> from /env/bin/init. >> >> However this means boot_board will not be run if booting manually (by >> running 'boot' from the barebox console). >> >> Shouldn't this script be called from /env/bin/boot instead? If a board >> needs any specific stuff to be done when booting, this probably >> applies both when autobooting and when booting manually (otherwise, >> anything that only applies only when autobooting could also be done >> from init_board instead of boot_board). > > The only boot_board script we have is > arch/arm/boards/at91sam9m10g45ek/env/bin/boot_board. Here a menu is > built which I think makes sense at that stage and not at init_board. The thing is, if boot_board is called from init, then it will not be called if autoboot is interrupted and you later boot manually with the boot command. We actually use boot_board to do some board-specific processing that should be done both when autobooting and when booting "manually". The way it is right now, this is not possible. With the change I am proposing, boards such as at91sam9m10g45ek could still do what they are doing now (just move the code to init_board instead). Or, with some tweaking, perhaps it could even be left in boot_board (with boot_board being called from boot). Is this specific board the only objection to the change I am proposing? If so I could try to come up with a patch which accomodates this specific case. Or are there other, more general objections? > > However, I would be glad to get rid of defaultenv-1 rather sooner than > later. Uhm. I actually like defaultenv-1 better than defaultenv-2. Why not keep both? Everyone can then make their choice :) Regards, Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia guille.rodriguez@gmail.com _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox