On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 02:42:16AM +0530, Dileep Katta wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On 18 March 2015 at 21:41, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:08:23AM +0530, Dileep Katta wrote: > > > > > - Added new configuration for Android fastboot > > > - This is based on following patch modified accordingly > > > > > http://git.omapzoom.org/?p=repo/u-boot.git;a=commit;h=b2e04f92b5d91c708b6fd6b79d2266966ac51f4b > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Angela Stegmaier <angelaba...@ti.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Dileep Katta <dileep.ka...@linaro.org> > > [snip] > > > @@ -43,6 +43,16 @@ > > > "uuid_disk=${uuid_gpt_disk};" \ > > > "name=rootfs,start=2MiB,size=-,uuid=${uuid_gpt_rootfs}" > > > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_DRA7XX_ANDROID > > > +/* Fastboot */ > > > +#define CONFIG_CMD_FASTBOOT > > > +#define CONFIG_ANDROID_BOOT_IMAGE > > > +#define CONFIG_USB_FASTBOOT_BUF_ADDR CONFIG_SYS_LOAD_ADDR > > > +#define CONFIG_USB_FASTBOOT_BUF_SIZE 0x2F000000 > > > +#define CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH > > > +#define CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH_MMC_DEV 1 > > > +#endif > > > + > > > #include <configs/ti_omap5_common.h> > > > > No, just enable fastboot. There's a growing population of people whose > > workflow is "use fastboot to shove a new test kernel at my device" that > > aren't strictly using Android, lets enable them. > > > OK, will enable fastboot unconditional. > Now there is no much difference for android_defconfig, but will still keep > separate config for future changes.
I remain unconvinced that we need a separate config upstream still. > > > @@ -115,7 +125,11 @@ > > > #define CONFIG_SPL_SPI_SUPPORT > > > #define CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD > > > #define CONFIG_SPL_SPI_FLASH_SUPPORT > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_DRA7XX_ANDROID > > > +#define CONFIG_SYS_SPI_U_BOOT_OFFS 0x80000 > > > +#else > > > #define CONFIG_SYS_SPI_U_BOOT_OFFS 0x40000 > > > +#endif > > > > Why are you moving U-Boot so much higher in SPI flash? > > This is done to accommodate larger size MLO. Oh that's right. Some parts can be made with a larger SRAM and thus we could use a larger MLO. But are we? What functionality would we be shoving into a larger MLO that would make sense to do this really? Frankly I had been thinking that in these parts it makes more sense to jump to full U-Boot and skip SPL rather than make SPL be very complicated. > > > +#define CONFIG_USBDOWNLOAD_GADGET > > > +#define CONFIG_USB_GADGET_VBUS_DRAW 2 > > > +#define CONFIG_G_DNL_MANUFACTURER "Texas Instruments" > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_CMD_FASTBOOT > > > +#define CONFIG_G_DNL_VENDOR_NUM 0x0451 > > > +#define CONFIG_G_DNL_PRODUCT_NUM 0xd022 > > > +#else > > > +#define CONFIG_G_DNL_VENDOR_NUM 0x0403 > > > +#define CONFIG_G_DNL_PRODUCT_NUM 0xBD00 > > > +#endif > > > +#define CONFIG_USB_GADGET_DUALSPEED > > > > Why can't we always use one vid/pid? > > > As we are restricted to use the vid which fastboot host application knows, > the other/original > vid/pid kept intact for the dependent functionality, if any. > Will check if 0x0403/0xBD00 could be removed. I think we can just always use the VID/PID that fastboot knows, DFU isn't nearly so picky and other gadget use cases don't care I believe. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot