Hi Bernhard,
On 07-07-15 11:26, Bernhard Nortmann wrote:
Am 06.07.2015 16:28, schrieb Ian Campbell:
On Mon, 2015-07-06 at 14:11 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
Ah right, I guess that makes sense, but if this is not going to
be a fire and forget command, and people still need to run more
fel commands after it then I'm wondering it this is worth the trouble
at all.
Perhaps do the exe by default but provide a way to ask not to? (Or vice
versa, but that seems less useful to me)
[...]
See above since the user still needs to do the exec I wonder
what the value is in saving the user the single extra
fel write for the u-boot-dtb.bin file. I think having a full
auto mode as described above would be better.
Historically wasn't this what the usb-boot script did (effectively a
wrapper around the fel tool). It's be nice if it either a) started
working again, b) said something when it wasn't supposed to work and
pointed in the right direction or c) went away so it stops being
confusingly tempting to people like me ;-)
a) was what I was thinking of when I wrote the last bit of
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2015-June/217743.html (which I've
still not gotten around to)
Ian.
I tend to agree with Ian here. My impression is that the fel utility
is meant to be the "one-trick pony", a low-level tool that handles
a single task (one command, out of several available) - but handles
that well / "right". Anything more sophisticated should probably be
done via scripting - that's what "usb-boot" is supposed to achieve.
I had fooled myself on this too (by missing the u-boot-dtb.bin
requirement and not adapting my FEL script) - and thought it
to be a problem in the SPL -> main U-Boot transition after the
switch to device model. Of course I was providing a 'broken'
u-boot that way (lacking the dtb data).
The "benefit" of the fel modification presented here is that the
utility would be able to gracefully handle _any_ u-boot-sunxi-with-spl.bin,
be it from 2015.04 ("pre-DTB"), or 2015.07+; without the user
(or script) having to pay attention to the correct filename for
the main binary.
Please see the mail I just send where I explain why the usb-boot script
currently cannot work. I really believe we need an u-boot patch to do
somthing akin to:
setenv boot_cmd "source 0x41000000"
When booting in FEL mode in certain cases, I believe that always doing
this is wrong, so we need some way for the fel tool to communicate to
u-boot that it should run a boot-script from ram. Then we can use
that to fix usb-boot, or simply fold the usb-boot functionality into
the fel tool.
I'm fine with keeping this functionality in a fixed usb-boot script,
but then I see little value in your "fel" patch instead a patch to
add a cmdline option to the "fel spl" command to set the magic which
u-boot will use to detect it should run a script from ram would be
better, and then everything else can be dealt with in the usb-boot
script.
Regards,
Hans
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"linux-sunxi" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
