On 01/18/2018 10:11 AM, Tom Rini wrote: > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 06:09:22PM +0000, York Sun wrote: >> On 01/18/2018 10:04 AM, Tom Rini wrote: >>>>> >>>>> With regards to dts files, this is another reason I would like to see >>>>> that done as a strict re-sync with Linux rather than a stand-alone >>>>> change. Saying we're importing file X from the kernel at revision Y >>>>> makes the license change pretty easy to spot and justify. >>>>> >>>> >>>> For the dts files, they already exist in U-Boot. Can the team still say >>>> "importing" from Linux? The files in U-Boot is only a small subset of >>>> those in Linux. >>> >>> Yes, if it's a strict replace file A with contents of the same file from >>> Linux, it's re-importing. I thought these boards had already re-synced >>> before but perhaps not? It's something we do from time to time on other >>> platforms. >> >> In this case, the contents of dts files are different from those in >> Linux. The only thing imported this time is the dual license. Is it >> still considered a re-sync? > > They should not be different at all. Anything U-Boot centric should be > in an appropriately named -u-boot.dtsi file. This facilitates keeping > the rest of the dts/dtsi files as exact copies of the ones in the > kernel. > > To put it another way, what is the reason they differ from the kernel? > And could they be changed to not, and use a -u-boot.dtsi (or several) so > that they can be kept in-sync with the kernel? >
The dts files in Linux are much much bigger. U-Boot only uses a small subset. There are many nodes not used by U-Boot. York _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot