[U-Boot] [PATCH v4 6/6] common: Generic loader for file system

[Tom Rini]

On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 09:47:17AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 25 July 2018 at 03:48, Michal Simek <michal.simek at xilinx.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 25.7.2018 08:31, Chee, Tien Fong wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2018-07-18 at 16:48 +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> > >> On 6.7.2018 10:28, tien.fong.chee at intel.com wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> From: Tien Fong Chee <tien.fong.chee at intel.com>
> > >>>
> [...]
> 
> > >>
> > >> Also that DT binding is quite weird and I don't think you will get
> > >> ACK
> > >> for this from device tree community at all. I think that calling via
> > >> platdata and avoid DT nodes would be better way to go.
> > > Why do you think DT binding is weird? The DT is designed based on Simon
> > > proposal, and i believe following the rules in DTS spec.
> > > There are some DT benefits with current design, i think someone may be
> > > maintainer need to made the final decision on the design.
> >
> > It is software configuration in file which should mostly describe
> > hardware and state for hardware configuration.
> >
> > Your fs_loader node is purely describe sw configuration which shouldn't
> > be here.
> > You have there run time configuration via variables. I think using only
> > this way is enough. Default variables will match what you would want to
> > add to DT.
> 
> I think DT makes sense in the U-Boot context.
> 
> We don't have a user space to handle policy decisions, and the
> 'chosen' node is a good place to configure these common features.
> 
> While you can argue that the partition or filesystem where an image
> comes from is a software config, it is something that has to be
> configured. It has impact on hardware too, since the FPGA has to get
> its firmware from somewhere. We use the chosen node to specify the
> UART to use, and this is no different. Again, we don't have user-space
> config files in U-Boot.
> 
> This argument comes up from time to time and I'd really like to put it
> to bed for U-Boot. I understand that Linux has its own approach and
> rules, but in some cases they serve U-Boot poorly.

I want to second this as well.  So long as we're using our prefix and
we've thought through and discussed what we're trying to do here, it's
OK to do things that might not be accepted for Linux.

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20180725/64974b81/attachment.sig>