Hi Tom, On 27 September 2016 at 19:55, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 03:52:27PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > >> Add an example usage of binman for a sunxi board. This involves adding the >> image definition to the device tree and using it in the Makefile. >> >> This is for example only. >> >> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> >> --- >> >> Changes in v2: None >> >> Makefile | 4 +--- >> arch/arm/dts/sun7i-a20-pcduino3.dts | 12 ++++++++++++ > > I think this shows the big problem with using binman today. For the > common case of ARM, where we sync in the dts* files from upstream, this > will add hunks that must not be overwritten each time. > > Looking at scripts/Makefile.lib::cmd_fdt I wonder if we couldn't come up > with some wildcard rule and check if, somewhere CONFIG'd ? $(BOARDDIR)/ > ? u-boot.dtsi exists add in -include that/file.dtsi to the CPP rule so > that we can keep the parts that will never get upstream separate.
We can do that, but I have found that most boards with the same SoC are the same, or similar. So for x86 [1] I put it in a separate patch with just an #include in the .dts file. We could have binman be a bit smarter about where it looks - e.g. if there is no binman node, it could look in the same directory for a file that matches the board name, or part of it? Regards, Simon [1] http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/674743/ _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot