Hi Marek,
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 at 20:50, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote:
>
> On 12/14/22 05:39, Simon Glass wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 at 12:46, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote:
> >>
> >> Commit d5ba6188dfb ("cmd: pxe_utils: Check fdtcontroladdr in label_boot")
> >> forces '$fdtcontroladdr' DT address as a third parameter of bootm command
> >> even if the PXE transfer pulls in a fitImage which contains configuration
> >> node with its own DT that is preferrable to be passed to Linux. Limit the
> >> $fdtcontroladdr fallback utilization to non-fitImages, since it is highly
> >> likely a fitImage would come with its own DT, while single-file images do
> >> need a separate DT.
> >>
> >> Fixes: d5ba6188dfb ("cmd: pxe_utils: Check fdtcontroladdr in label_boot")
> >> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de>
> >> ---
> >> Cc: Peter Hoyes <peter.ho...@arm.com>
> >> Cc: Ramon Fried <rfried....@gmail.com>
> >> Cc: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>
> >> ---
> >> boot/pxe_utils.c | 2 +-
> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>
> >
> > I'd suggest adding an explicit comment in the code too, so it is
> > easier to understand when this gets refactored later.
>
> I sent a fixed version of this patch, can you add this RB to it too ?
>
> Regarding comment in the code, there is already one massive comment
> explaining it just above, see the pxe_utils.c content in the sources.
" * Scenario 3: If there is an fdtcontroladdr specified, pass it along to
* bootm, and adjust argc appropriately."
But are you not changing that? So update the comment?
Regards,
Simon
