[U-Boot] [PATCH V3 5/6] omap3_beagle: support findfdt and loadfdt for devicetree support

[Nishanth Menon]

On 15:07-20130715, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Op 15 jul. 2013, om 14:25 heeft Nishanth Menon <nm at ti.com> het volgende geschreven:
> > On 14:16-20130715, Koen Kooi wrote:
> >> Op 15 jul. 2013, om 14:11 heeft Nishanth Menon <nm at ti.com> het volgende geschreven:
> >> 
[..]
> >>> +	"findfdt=" \
> >>> +		"if test $beaglerev = AxBx; then " \
> >>> +			"setenv fdtfile omap3-beagle.dtb; fi; " \
> >>> +		"if test $beaglerev = Cx; then " \
> >>> +			"setenv fdtfile omap3-beagle.dtb; fi; " \
> >>> +		"if test $beaglerev = xMAB; then " \
> >>> +			"setenv fdtfile omap3-beagle-xm.dtb; fi; " \
> >>> +		"if test $beaglerev = xMC; then " \
> >>> +			"setenv fdtfile omap3-beagle-xm.dtb; fi; " \
> >>> +		"if test $fdtfile = undefined; then " \
> >>> +			"echo WARNING: Could not determine device tree to use; fi; \0" \
> >> 
> >> With the remote chance of a future xM rev D, can you make the fallthrough be 'omap3-beagle-xm.dtb' intead of 'undefined'?
> > Lets add the detection of xMD and along with that we add
> > omap3-beagle-xm.dtb detection - makes sense? OR do we assume all
> > un-matched devices default to beagle xMD? what if there was a vanilla
> > beagle rev D?
> 
> The fallthrough case should always be the most recent board rev, any other way will just make the HW guys spoof the ID in the design and we all know how that ends :(
Fair enough. Anyone else has a contrary opinion?

If none, the following is the replacement patch, wont repost unless a new series
is needed: