On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 01:52:21AM +0200, Ladislav Michl wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 07:45:14PM -0400, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:44:17AM +0200, Ladislav Michl wrote: > [snip] > > > Gah... I have to screw it up while resolving conflicts with upstream > > > changes. > > > Obviously MACH_TYPE has to remain the same. Will do v2. I'm sorry for > > > that. > > > > But why do we even need to set MACH_TYPE these days? > > That's only needed for non-device tree kernel boot. These boards run mostly > vendor provided kernels based on TI 2.6.32 or 2.6.37 kernel tree with > daughter boards specific patches on top of it. Enric is concerned not > to break that support, so I'm trying to keep it.
OK, if you're still supporting stuff that old then yes, it makes sense. And we can't get this right at run time? -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
