Hello Michael, > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2021 10:48 PM > To: ZHIZHIKIN Andrey <[email protected]> > Cc: Ye Li <[email protected]>; Stefano Babic <[email protected]>; Fabio Estevam > <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Ariel D'Alessandro > <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Anthony > Brandon <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] imx8m: Drop env_get_location for imx8mn and imx8mp > > > Hi ZHIZHIKIN
It's Andrey, mail client swaps last and first names. :) > > On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 7:53 PM ZHIZHIKIN Andrey > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hello Michael, > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: U-Boot <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Michael Trimarchi > > > Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2021 2:58 PM > > > To: Ye Li <[email protected]>; Stefano Babic <[email protected]>; Fabio Estevam > > > <[email protected]> > > > Cc: [email protected]; Ariel D'Alessandro > <[email protected]>; > > > [email protected]; Anthony Brandon > > > <[email protected]> > > > Subject: [RFC PATCH] imx8m: Drop env_get_location for imx8mn and imx8mp > > > > > > > > > This function defined for two architecture is not really clean > > > and can be generate problem when people add a new board > > > > Not sure what you mean by "not clean" and "can generate problems" here, > > perhaps you can elaborate that more in commit message? > > > > Sorry, I will adjust the commit message. This should be done at board > level, that > would like to define the enviroment from it's own config or from some specific > setup. From your other patch I've seen on ML [1], combined with this one - it looks like you're trying to revert 2707faf01f ("imx8mn/imx8mp: override env_get_offset and env_get_location"). If you go ahead with both patches, then I suggest you submit a revert instead. > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael Trimarchi <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > arch/arm/mach-imx/imx8m/soc.c | 42 ----------------------------------- > > > > Quick git grep shows that there are boards that have it implemented, > > but only two CPU families have them: > > - arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/cpu.c > > - arch/arm/mach-imx/imx8m/soc.c > > > > - board/aristainetos/aristainetos.c > > - board/engicam/stm32mp1/stm32mp1.c > > -board/renesas/alt/alt.c > > - board/renesas/gose/gose.c > > - board/renesas/koelsch/koelsch.c > > - board/renesas/lager/lager.c > > - board/renesas/porter/porter.c > > - board/renesas/silk/silk.c > > - board/renesas/stout/stout.c > > - board/sandbox/sandbox.c > > - board/st/stm32mp1/stm32mp1.c > > - board/sunxi/board.c > > - board/xilinx/versal/board.c > > - board/xilinx/zynq/board.c > > - board/xilinx/zynqmp/zynqmp.c > > > > If it does interfere with certain things you do - why not moving > > it to imx8mn-evk and imx8mp-evk instead? At least this would give > > adopters a hint, as EVKs are normally a reference target. > > Yes, the patch is only involve the imx8mp and imx8mn. > For the problem is that make no sense to define an unique way for multiple > board. One board can boot from emmc and having env on spi flash etc I see, but this is rather a specialization to me. How can one ensure that the env deployed on another storage device is valid for the media you're booting from? Anyways, I suggest that this function is kept in both imx8mn and imx8mp evk boards instead of being completely dropped. > > Michael > > > > -- andrey > > > > -- > Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi > Co-Founder & Chief Executive Officer > M. +39 347 913 2170 > [email protected] > __________________________________ > > Amarula Solutions BV > Joop Geesinkweg 125, 1114 AB, Amsterdam, NL > T. +31 (0)85 111 9172 > [email protected] Link: [1]: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/[email protected]/ -- andrey
