Re: [RFC 1/4] dtoc: add POC for dtb shrink

2020-07-07 Thread Walter Lozano
Hi Rasmus, On 7/7/20 11:53, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: On 07/07/2020 16.32, Walter Lozano wrote: Hi Rasmus, On 7/7/20 11:15, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: On 19/06/2020 23.11, Walter Lozano wrote: Some additional reduction could be possible by only keeping the nodes for whose compatible string is su

Re: [RFC 1/4] dtoc: add POC for dtb shrink

2020-07-07 Thread Rasmus Villemoes
On 07/07/2020 16.32, Walter Lozano wrote: > Hi Rasmus, > > On 7/7/20 11:15, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: >> On 19/06/2020 23.11, Walter Lozano wrote: >> >>> Some additional reduction could be possible by only keeping the nodes >>> for >>> whose compatible string is supported by any enabled driver. Howe

Re: [RFC 1/4] dtoc: add POC for dtb shrink

2020-07-07 Thread Walter Lozano
Hi Rasmus, On 7/7/20 11:15, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: On 19/06/2020 23.11, Walter Lozano wrote: Some additional reduction could be possible by only keeping the nodes for whose compatible string is supported by any enabled driver. However, this requires to add extra logic to parse config files an

Re: [RFC 1/4] dtoc: add POC for dtb shrink

2020-07-07 Thread Rasmus Villemoes
On 19/06/2020 23.11, Walter Lozano wrote: > Some additional reduction could be possible by only keeping the nodes for > whose compatible string is supported by any enabled driver. However, > this requires to add extra logic to parse config files and map > configuration to compatible strings. If t

Re: [RFC 1/4] dtoc: add POC for dtb shrink

2020-07-07 Thread Walter Lozano
Hi Simon, Thanks for your time. On 6/7/20 16:21, Simon Glass wrote: Hi Walter, On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 at 15:11, Walter Lozano wrote: Based on several reports and discussions [1], [2] it is clear that U-Boot's footprint is always a concern, and any kind of reduction is an improvement. In partic

Re: [RFC 1/4] dtoc: add POC for dtb shrink

2020-07-06 Thread Simon Glass
Hi Walter, On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 at 15:11, Walter Lozano wrote: > > Based on several reports and discussions [1], [2] it is clear that U-Boot's > footprint is always a concern, and any kind of reduction is an > improvement. > > In particular dtb is one of the sources of footprint increment, as > U-

[RFC 1/4] dtoc: add POC for dtb shrink

2020-06-19 Thread Walter Lozano
Based on several reports and discussions [1], [2] it is clear that U-Boot's footprint is always a concern, and any kind of reduction is an improvement. In particular dtb is one of the sources of footprint increment, as U-Boot uses the same dtb as Linux. However is interesting to note that U-Boot d