-----Original Message----- From: wd@denx.de [mailto:wd@denx.de] Sent: den 17 december 2006 01:38 To: Joakim Tjernlund Cc: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] builtin OF tree dtb gone
In message 007701c7214c$a1c6f430$1e67a8c0@Jocke you wrote:
Don't like this idea, its not a runtime/kernel load feature, IMHO. What devices that is supported should be provided by firmware.
Then store the DTB in flash, probably as part of your production / update mechanism. Nobody prevents you from doing this.
Well, newer versions of U-boot prevents me from embedding the OF tree inside the u-boot image.
I disagree here.
Clearly, but you don't say why. You are saying that a
multi-file image
might work but that won't work in a system where you need
different OF trees.
Of course not.
I am supposed to supply X multi-file images, one for each
board where only the
DTB differ?
No.
For a complete system you need U-Boot plus DTB plus Linux kernel [plus root file system ...]. You may find, that for different boards any of these components may be different or the same, so no matter which you bundle together it will work fine in some setups, and be unconvenient in others. The best flexibility is when all three are separate, so that's the default option we provide. If you want to combine U-Boot plus DTB, fine, you define your [flash] memory map. If you want to combine Linux and DTB, ok, use a multifile image.
"in some setups", that's the point. Our setup works fine with an embedded OF tree in u-boot. If I am to adapt to this new method of supplying the OF tree, not only will I have to repartion the flash to fit the tree in there, I also need to make sure that some 15-20 people learns this new concept for no real gain.
It is nothing wrong with having the ability provide a OF tree at boot time, but forcing everyone to do so is. The most flexible way is to have both.
Regards Jocke
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk