[U-Boot] [PATCH v4 10/11] Add u-boot-pad.bin target to the Makefile
scottwood at freescale.com
Fri Sep 21 20:33:15 CEST 2012
On 09/21/2012 12:43:48 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Tom,
> In message
> <5FBF8E85CA34454794F0F7ECBA79798F379F6FD992 at HQMAIL04.nvidia.com> you
> > If you flash u-boot-dtb-tegra.bin, you'll get a fully functioning
> > U-Boot. There's an intermediate file (u-boot-dtb.bin) that I assume
> > is u-boot.bin+dtb - I'm not sure why it's left around - Allen could
> > comment here.
> I _dislike_ the idea of having image names which include architecture
> or even board parts. I would really like to have generic names, that
> can be used in a consistent way across platforms, architectures and
> > So in my eyes, all you really need is u-boot-dtb-tegra.bin - an
> > unwieldy name, to be sure, but it seems to satisfy your request for
> > Soc identifier in the name. I voted for just having u-boot.bin be
> Please reconsider. I definitely do NOT want to have SoC names or that
> in any such images!
> IIRC, the original idea was to provide image names (common for all
> architectures, SoCs, boards) that only depend on where you install
> U-Boot to. in this way, we would have:
> - u-boot.bin for the generic case (say, for installation into NOR
> flash, no SPL or similar needed).
> - u-boot-nand.bin
> for installation in NAND (with all needed headers,
> padding etc. included)
> - u-boot-onenand.bin
> for installation in OneNAND
> - u-boot.sd for installation on a SDCard
> [actually we have an inconsistency in names here; this
> should have been "u-boot-sd.bin" or maybe even better
> It is very important to me that we do NOT include any architectures,
> SoCs, or board specifc parts in the names because this will cause
> major PITA for all kind of automatic test suites etc.
The awkwardness with naming based on nand/onenand/sd is that we no
longer have build infrastructure that is specific to the type of boot
device -- and IIRC with some of the newer SPL targets, the same image
works on multiple types of boot device.
Having u-boot.bin be the final output regardless of internal
implementation details such as spl would avoid that problem, and be
even nicer to automated testing than the nand/onenand/sd names.
More information about the U-Boot