[PATCH 1/5] arm: dts: k3-am625-beagleplay-u-boot/r5: Just depend on k3-binman.dtsi

[Nishanth Menon]

On 08:34-20231106, Bryan Brattlof wrote:
> Hi Nishanth!
> 
> On November  4, 2023 thus sayeth Nishanth Menon:
> > With the upcoming folder separation, there is no further need to depend
> > on am625-binman.dtsi. Duplicate the existing definitions to u-boot.dtsi
> > and r5.dts as appropriate.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm at ti.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Bryan Brattlof <bb at ti.com>
> 
> > ---
> >  arch/arm/dts/k3-am625-beagleplay-u-boot.dtsi | 160 +++++++++++++++++--
> >  arch/arm/dts/k3-am625-r5-beagleplay.dts      |  39 +++++
> >  2 files changed, 184 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> 
> ...
> 
> > -&spl_am625_sk_dtb_unsigned {
> > -	filename = SPL_AM625_BEAGLEPLAY_DTB;
> > -};
> > +	ti-spl_unsigned {
> > +		filename = "tispl.bin_unsigned";
> 
> If all of the beagle-plays are using the GP security variant shouldn't 
> we remove the _unsigned?

Today, they are GP, but there is already plans being discussed for
hs-fs variants - timelines aren't very clear though.

> 
> > +		pad-byte = <0xff>;
> > +
> 
> ...
> 
> > -&am625_sk_dtb_unsigned {
> > -	filename = AM625_BEAGLEPLAY_DTB;
> > +	u-boot_unsigned {
> > +		filename = "u-boot.img_unsigned";
> 
> And here? I don't really have an opinion either way. Just curious if 
> we've thought about that.
> 
> > +		pad-byte = <0xff>;
> > +
> 
> ~Bryan
> 

-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3  1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D