On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Michal Simek monstr@monstr.eu wrote:
On 11/12/2013 03:46 PM, Chin Liang See wrote:
Hi all,
On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 11:17 +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
On 11/12/2013 10:56 AM, Detlev Zundel wrote:
Hi Michal,
On 11/11/2013 09:33 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 08:26:02PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Altera Cyclone 5 board is very different board (big, rectangular, > expensive) than EBV Socrates (small, circular, cheap) board.
Different
> parts are used there, too, but same configuration of u-boot works on > both. Nevertheless, printing wrong name confuses users. > > Therefore this splits the configuration so that u-boot knows they
are
> different. So far it is only used for correcting the puts, but there > may be other uses in future. > > Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek pavel@denx.de
Is there any way at run time to tell which board we are on?
Why do you care about board name in general?
We care for board names for a very long time in U-Boot and I'd like to keep this. I actually expect a sensible board name on any platform
that
I touch. The board name is an important extra information additional
to
the SoC name. So the question is the other way round - since when do
we
_not_ care about board names?
There could be i2c memory on board where you can find out this
information but that's
problematic if it is empty or you want to use this i2c for something
else.
For all microblaze boards I use XILINX_BOARD_NAME which reflects hw
design
(if user is smart enough board name is the part of hw design name). For zynq/socfpga sensible solution is probably to load this name for
DTS.
Currently, the SOCFPGA SPL is customized through a set of handoff files which located at board folders. These handoff files are generated by tools based on board and user design in FPGA. With that, not much decision being made during run time based on the board. With this handoff and tools approach, it will shield off the complexity of hardware configuration and errors (if user change it manually without tools help). Thanks
Which nice copy of our approach. :-)
Ugh...that came from you guys? I can't stand that approach. Coming from the i.MX world, this makes the end user so reliant on proprietary tools.
Dinh
But anyway I believe that you are also generating one macro which define name of this configuration based on hw design/board you are using. And then you can use this macro for showing board/design name in u-boot.
Thanks, Michal
-- Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng), OpenPGP -> KeyID: FE3D1F91 w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854 Maintainer of Linux kernel - Microblaze cpu - http://www.monstr.eu/fdt/ Maintainer of Linux kernel - Xilinx Zynq ARM architecture Microblaze U-BOOT custodian and responsible for u-boot arm zynq platform
U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot