[U-Boot-Users] builtin OF tree dtb gone

[Pantelis Antoniou]

On 16 Δεκ 2006, at 11:32 ΠΜ, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jerry Van Baren [mailto:gerald.vanbaren at comcast.net]
>> Sent: den 16 december 2006 17:08
>> To: Joakim Tjernlund
>> Cc: u-boot-users at lists.sourceforge.net
>> Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] builtin OF tree dtb gone
>>
>> Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>>> While trying out the latest u-boot from my board I noticed that
>>> support for using a prebuilt OF tree compiled int u-boot is gone.
>>> The oftree_dtb symbol is gone and I can't find a replacement.
>>>
>>> Why was it removed and is there a replacement?
>>>
>>> If there isn't a replacement I request that
>>> one is added.
>>>
>>>  Jocke
>>
>> I'm not the authority on this, but I believe the intent is that you
>> compile the blob outside of u-boot and then you can load it
>> into RAM via
>> tftp or burn it into flash if you want it permanently on the board.
>> Other than having to download and burn two things (u-boot and the dtb
>> blob) rather than one, having it burn into flash separately is no
>> different from compiling it into the u-boot image and is
>> aesthetically
>> much cleaner and more flexible.
>
> "Other than having to download and burn two things" is a rather big
> deal to me. First it adds extra work actually get two images into  
> the board.
> Secondly, now you have to reserve a DTB flash partion so you have
> somewhere to store it and that is a waste of space.
> Then you have to add even more args to the boot command to tell  
> uboot where
> to find it.
>
> To me this new OF seems like a nice feature for developing new
> stuff, but once you are done and ready to ship it only complicates
> things for boards that don't need this new flexibility.
>
>  Jocke
>

I agree.

As the guy that did the original implementation, my intent was to  
keep the
DTB along with u-boot.

I don't know where you get the idea that it's more "flexible" or  
"cleaner" to
have it on a different partition. That blob will never change after  
the board
is debugged, so you've only introduced an extra complicated step to  
boot a kernel.

When I have enough free time (yeah right) I'll work on getting even  
the u-boot
getting it's parameters from the blob - moving stuff away from the  
config.h file
if possible.

Regards

Pantelis


>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ---
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to  
> share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php? 
> page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> U-Boot-Users mailing list
> U-Boot-Users at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users