[PATCH 2/2] Nokia RX-51: Remove CONFIG_PREBOOT from defconfig
trini at konsulko.com
Wed Jul 13 01:15:45 CEST 2022
On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 01:11:35AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Tuesday 12 July 2022 18:58:31 Tom Rini wrote:
> > It really isn't, that's why the plain text environment stuff is a good
> > step in the right direction. What I'm not sure about how to best handle
> > is making it easy for a user, rather than developer, to override
> > environment values too. What I mean he
> Maybe the important question is: Why is needed CONFIG_PREBOOT define at
> all? Why it is not enough just to set preboot= env variable? And same
> questions for all other CONFIG_<name_of_env> options.
I'm sorry if this sounds snarky, I don't intend it to. But, size.
Maybe that doesn't matter so much these days for the size savings on
> > > For all this stuff is needed some stronger tool/language than Kconfig,
> > > e.g. C preprocessor (like it was before in config.h) or any similar
> > > stronger macro language (e.g. m4) or script languages (shell / python).
> > Yes, so, take a look at 5c3f6a320678d64c9fa0c42755488822a033b567 as an
> > example of moving a board away from board config.h and to something
> > else. What I'm not sure on is how to best handle preboot in this case
> > as I'm not quite liking "Enable CONFIG_PREBOOT and then edit
> > .../boardname.env to set preboot to the right value".
> > --
> > Tom
> With that commit, all env variables are moved into separate file. This
> file can be parsed by other tools and at compile it is possible to
> extract current value of preboot= env variable or check if preboot= is
> defined. Cannot be by this logic automatically defined/expanded
> CONFIG_PREBOOT symbol? Of course, it would not be Kconfig symbol
That sounds interesting.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 659 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the U-Boot