[U-Boot] [PATCH 0/7] fdt: Replace u-boot-dtb.bin with u-boot.bin

Otavio Salvador otavio.salvador at ossystems.com.br
Mon Jan 25 22:57:54 CET 2016


Hello Simon,

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 6:30 PM, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> At present u-boot.bin holds the plain U-Boot binary without the device tree.
> This is somewhat annoying since you need either u-boot.bin or u-boot-dtb.bin
> depending on whether device tree is used.
>
> This series adjusts the build such that u-boot.bin includes a device tree,
> and the plain binary is in u-boot-nodtb.bin. For now u-boot-dtb.bin remains
> the same.
>
> This should be acceptable since:
>
> - without OF_CONTROL, u-boot.bin still does not include a device tree
> - with OF_CONTROL, u-boot-dtb.bin does not change
>
> The main impact is build systems which are set up to use u-boot.bin as
> the output file and then add a device tree. These will have to change to use
> u-boot-nodtb.bin instead.
>
> The original decision to use a separate u-boot-dtb.bin was aimed at allowing
> any device tree file to be concatenated to the u-boot.bin image after the
> build. However this no-longer seems so important. More important is the
> convenience of using the same output file regardless of the setting for
> OF_CONTROL.

This makes sense for user-friendness point of view and still allows
for build systems to interact over the raw copy of U-Boot to
concatenate it with the desired set of Device Tree files.

I think the more platforms move to Device Tree (from U-Boot point of
view) the more important this change is.

I do support this addition. Tom, please make sure to mention this on
the NEWS entry for the next release as integrations must to be aware
of this behavior change.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://code.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750


More information about the U-Boot mailing list