On July 17, 2023 thus sayeth Nishanth Menon: > On 13:39-20230717, Manorit Chawdhry wrote: > > [...] > > > > > + > > > > +#define BOOT_TARGET_DEVICES(func) \ > > > > + BOOT_TARGET_MMC(func) \ > > > > + BOOT_TARGET_USB(func) \ > > > > + BOOT_TARGET_PXE(func) \ > > > > + BOOT_TARGET_DHCP(func) > > > > + > > > > +#include <config_distro_bootcmd.h> > > > > > > With standard boot you should be able to drop all of the above, since > > > the normal order is mmc, usb, pxe, dhcp by default. But you can add a > > > "boot_targets" env var if you like. > > > > > > The one exception is TI_MMC. What is that, exactly? > > > > > > > TI_MMC is our custom boot mechanism that we actually support as a part > > of our SDK, we had been using this in am62ax like the way I have done > > here, am not really sure why we hooked it into the distroboot if that is > > the question that you are asking, maybe Nishanth/Bryan can help with > > that as Bryan had done it for am62ax [0] but we do this boot mechanism > > for sure. > > > > [0]: https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/[email protected]/ > > > > 2 cents: > There is no reason for us to have our own TI_MMC option. we should just > go standard_boot. all the SDK stuff really should be fixed if they dont > work with standard_boot. >
I Agree. I put that in with the hopes we could just add a CFG_* or CONFIG_* option to compile our scripts out once we have everything in the SDK ready. But I agree with Nishanth, we should be looking at standard_boot now. ~Bryan
