[U-Boot] [PATCH v7 0/7] arm: socfpga: update default u-boot environment

[Marek Vasut]

On 01/26/2017 11:33 PM, Dalon Westergreen wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 22:41 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 01/26/2017 10:05 PM, Dalon Westergreen wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 21:54 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 01/26/2017 09:31 PM, Dalon Westergreen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Dalon Westergreen <dalon.westergreen at intel.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> These patches update the boot and os partition numbers in
>>>>> the                   
>>>>> default uboot environment for a number of socfpga
>>>>> boards.  Per                  
>>>>> request, common environment configurations have been moved to
>>>>> a                 
>>>>> shared
>>>>> header.                                                                 
>>>>>  
>>>>>
>>>>> Changed in v7:
>>>>>   Changed the bootloader partition to 3 to match the default layout for
>>>>>   socfpga.  commit 61520ac4d5545cc8d2e1792092e46ab8043d5f36 changed this
>>>>> to
>>>>> 1
>>>>>   which broke a number of socfpga kits.
>>>>
>>>> And this commit will break another bulk of kits, great ...
>>> I think the only kit that MAY be affected is the DE1 kit and I
>>> actually dont even think that is true b/c they are probably
>>> using the method described in the former thread where they just 
>>> write the u-boot-with-spl.sfp to +64KB.  
>>> CONFIG_SPL_ABORT_ON_RAW_IMAGE is defined for the board.
>>
>> And all the kits which used the environment in mainline U-Boot.
>>
>>>
>>> If i had a board I would test it.  But that said, this is currently 
>>> how all of the altera kits, and the de0 kit work.
>>
>> I'd be happy to take the previous patchset without this new "windows
>> compatibility"/"ancient u-boot compatibility" crap and then proceed
>> with a discussion on this new topic.
>>
>> But now that it came up, well, I guess I'll wait for Dinh to make the
>> decision, since we clearly have totally different opinions.
>>
> Thanks.  I am open to any suggestions, i could just wrap the 
> boot partition number in socfpga_common with an ifndef? and define 
> it as partition 3 in the altera boards which currently use that setup?

Uh no, let's not add more ifdefs.

> another option would be to re-implement the method used in the older
> 2013.01.01 uboot used by socfpga which, rather than using a partition
> number specifically looked for a partition of type 0xa2 making the
> partition number irrelevant?

Either that or load u-boot.img from FS (even better). Do you have an
example patch for the first approach ? How intrusive is it ?

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut