Hi Marek, On Fri, 2026-07-24 at 06:21 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 7/9/26 1:53 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > > Hello again, > > > > > In case of CONFIG_OPTEE=y and "optional" keyword and missing tee.bin > > > > blob , I think the node should be retained, because the user might > > > > inject tee.bin into the u-boot.itb after the build with some "mkimage -F > > > > ..." invocation. > > > > > > > > In case of CONFIG_OPTEE=n , there should be no tee node. > > > > > > I think I need more time to digest your points. You did not convince > > > me that when CONFIG_OPTEE=n > > > there should not be any tee node. The rest of the discussion is based > > > on this point so I would like > > > to avoid discussing things further for now. > > > If we can get another opinion on this discussion that'd be great I > > > think. Either way, I am okay > > > with taking this patch. Again, it is my opinion that this is not a > > > fix, rather we are losing a > > > feature. > > > > Please do keep digesting. Please do keep two things in mind -- if the > > platform does run optee-os, the software stack should be aware of it. If > > there is a special case where the software stack should not be aware of > > it, please put that into board DTs or board U-Boot extras DTs, but that > > use case is special and non-default. Finally, including dead code / dead > > DT nodes in build artifacts that only grows the size of the build > > artifact is not good. > > It has been two weeks now, what is the current state ?
My opinion on the necessity of this patch hasn't changed, yet. But I stand by what I said previously: > Either way, I am okay > with taking this patch. Yannic
