Hi Samsung developers, Simon Glass,
2014-09-09 1:10 GMT+09:00 Masahiro YAMADA yamada.m@jp.panasonic.com:
Hi Stephen,
2014-09-09 0:58 GMT+09:00 Stephen Warren swarren@wwwdotorg.org:
On 09/08/2014 09:57 AM, Masahiro YAMADA wrote:
Hi Stephen,
2014-09-09 0:04 GMT+09:00 Stephen Warren swarren@wwwdotorg.org:
I don't believe this is the correct approach; CONFIG_OF_CONTROL isn't a user-configurable option, and hence shouldn't show up in *_defconfig. "select OF_CONTROL" in a Kconfig file probably makes sense though.
I think it depends on the board (SoC).
In my understanding, Zynq boards should work with/without Device Tree control. (Moreover, Zynq boards work with/without SPL)
At least as for Zynq, CONFIG_OF_CONTROL ( and CONFIG_SPL too) is a user-configurable option.
(Michal, please correct me if I am wrong.)
I am not familiar with Tegra SoCs, but do Tegra boards always Device Tree? ( and only work with SPL ?)
If so,
config TEGRA select SPL select OF_CONTROL
looks better?
That looks correct for Tegra.
OK. I will send v2. CONFIG_OF_CONTROL in tegra defconfigs will go away.
(BTW, I forgot to mention a famous board; beaglebone black.
am335_boneblack_defconfig disables CONFIG_OF_CONTROL, whereas am335_boneblack_vboot_defconfig enables it. )
Before posting v2 of this series, please let me ask the same question on Exynos and Sandbox
Do Exynos boards always need Device Tree to run U-Boot? (that is, CONFIG_OF_CONTROL must be "select"ed.)
or
Do they work with/without Device Tree? (that is, users can enable/disable via "make menuconfig" or friends.)
What about Sandbox?
Best Regards Masahiro Yamada