Hello Marcel,
Am Donnerstag, den 26.08.2021, 14:14 +0200 schrieb Marcel Ziswiler:
From: Marcel Ziswiler marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com
With the move to using binman to generate SPL aka u-boot-spl-ddr.bin and U-Boot proper aka u-boot.itb every board now covers such configuration in its own U-Boot specific device tree include. Introduce a new common imx8mm-binman.dtsi which covers the common part of that configuration.
Signed-off-by: Marcel Ziswiler marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com
arch/arm/dts/imx8mm-binman.dtsi | 136 ++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/dts/imx8mm-cl-iot-gate-u-boot.dtsi | 126 ++-------------- arch/arm/dts/imx8mm-evk-u-boot.dtsi | 124 +--------------- .../dts/imx8mm-kontron-n801x-s-u-boot.dtsi | 123 +--------------- arch/arm/dts/imx8mm-venice-u-boot.dtsi | 120 +--------------- arch/arm/dts/imx8mm-verdin-u-boot.dtsi | 123 +--------------- 6 files changed, 156 insertions(+), 596 deletions(-) create mode 100644 arch/arm/dts/imx8mm-binman.dtsi
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/imx8mm-binman.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/imx8mm- binman.dtsi new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..2d98c1ef577 --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/arm/dts/imx8mm-binman.dtsi
is it really necessary to create a new binman include? I have added the nodes for imx8mp directly to the imx8mp-u-boot.dtsi. I guess you did this because not all boards are converted yet. But I have tried this when I moved binman to the common include for imx8mp. As the phycore- imx8mp was also not converted at that point. It did not hurt having the binman nodes included. At least back then.
I just not like to see that the file structure diverges. If there is a good reason I'd rather also move the binman nodes for imx8mp to a imx8mp-binman.dtsi.
Regards, Teresa