On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 04:00:30PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 01/31/2016 06:10 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > >At present u-boot.bin holds the plain U-Boot binary without the device tree. > >This is somewhat annoying since you need either u-boot.bin or u-boot-dtb.bin > >depending on whether device tree is used. > > > >This series adjusts the build such that u-boot.bin includes a device tree if > >enabled, and the plain binary is in u-boot-nodtb.bin. For now u-boot-dtb.bin > >remains the same. > > > >This should be acceptable since: > > > >- without OF_CONTROL, u-boot.bin still does not include a device tree > >- with OF_CONTROL, u-boot-dtb.bin does not change > > > >The main impact is to build systems which are set up to use u-boot.bin as > >the output file and then add a device tree. These will have to change to use > >u-boot-nodtb.bin instead. > > > >The original decision to use a separate u-boot-dtb.bin was aimed at allowing > >any device tree file to be concatenated to the u-boot.bin image after the > >build. However this no-longer seems so important. More important is the > >convenience of using the same output file regardless of the setting for > >OF_CONTROL. > > The series, > Tested-by: Stephen Warren <[email protected] > > (Both out T124-and-before and T210-and-later flashing processes > still seem to work OK with the new file naming etc.) > > Patches 1-3, > Reviewed-by: Stephen Warren <[email protected]>
I've pushed this since I want -rc1 to have it (so everyone sees it and adjusts now on a clean tag) and the feedback seems like minor updates that we can do after the fact. Thanks! -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
