Dear Otavio Salvador,
Putting Stefano on Cc, why is he omitted?
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Marek Vasut marex@denx.de wrote:
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Otavio Salvador
otavio@ossystems.com.br wrote:
I prefer to have this as is and share documentation with mx28. The NAND ought to be done providing same interface so one doc for it all. I think change it in next version is wrong and confuse users.
Ping?
We won't be able to get rid of mxsboot for NAND use-case so I'd prefer to have it for SD as well. For me it does not matter much as I use OE and it automates it all; but for ordinary user it is important to it to be consistent so all 'mxs' SoC would work same way from user point of view.
If we find a better way of doing things in future we can base on this and improve it later but please let's get it in and move forward...
Does my proposed patch not work for you? (the one which shifts the bootstream payload to block 4 in partition 1)
I gave it a try today.
And it works for mx23evk; I did not test it in mx28.
So what is the plan? I did not check the NAND format yet to know if it is the same between mx28 and mx23 but I do want the machines merged as soon as possible so people can play with it and find bugs.
The plan is to: 1) Figure out what's with MX23 -- did you place FSL supp. ticket already? 2) If 1) fails, try my patch on mx28 (since mx23 ignores it anyway and we can't figure out why?)
Best regards, Marek Vasut