[U-Boot-Users] Configuration System
sam at ravnborg.org
Fri Apr 30 23:46:39 CEST 2004
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 11:05:11AM -0500, Jon Loeliger wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 10:39, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > > With respect to selecting architecture it must be pretty genial,
> > > otherwise the current scheme is preferable.
> I confess, I am not sure what constitutes "genial" here.
> >From the high-level perspective, my current notion is to
> roughly ask three basic questions at the onset:
> - What CPU Architecture is being targeted?
> (ARM, MIPS, PPC, Xscale, etc)
> - Given the CPU Architecture is now known, which processor
> is being selected? This might involve an intermediate step
> in which a "family" of processors might be selected to help
> narrow the selection. For example, maybe it is OK to just
> offer the 7 XSCALE processors directly (ixdp425, xm250, etc),
> while the prolific PPC might do a PPC4xx, 82xx, 85xx, etc
> selection for family in order to get to a specific cpu
> such as the mpc8540.
> - What board is being targeted?
> (ADS, CDS, IceCube, etc)
> Basically anything in u-boot/boards that is appropriate
> for the given target CPU Arch or specific CPU.
It is better not asking less obvious questions.
So when I know I have board XXX why should I then select CPU and
On the other hand knowing that I want an ARM, then I expect to see a
list of available boards. Did I only select ARM9, again a even
smaller set of boards.
Maybe this was what you had in mind already - my point is that it
should be intuitive and simple. Simple from both a usage and
implementation point of view.
But I see all this as something that can come later, the better
approach is to start out small and incremental add more.
More information about the U-Boot