On 01/17/2017 10:14 PM, Lokesh Vutla wrote: > > [..snip..] > >>>>>> +CONFIG_OF_LIST="am335x-evm am335x-bone am335x-boneblack am335x-evmsk >>>>>> am335x-bonegreen am335x-icev2" >>>>> >>>>> Just wondering, do we have HS variants of all these boards? If not we >>>>> can just keep am335x-evm. >>>>> >>>> >>>> We don't "technically" have HS vs non-HS versions of any board, the >>>> boards are the same, the non-HS ones simply have the security features >>>> locked out. If the silicon they put on any of these boards is not locked >>>> out then it becomes an HS board. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>>> >>>> But, yes, I only know of unlocked AM335x's currently being placed on the >>>> standard EVMs for now. >>>> >>> okay. Then drop all the other dtbs from the list. >>> >> >> I'm not sure what that would get us, the differences between non-HS and >> HS have nothing to do with the devices on the boards. This will only >> create a support burden if someone gets an unlocked Beaglebone for >> instance. Why limit the *more* feature-full chip? HS chips needs to be >> thought of as they are, a superset of the non-HS chips, not as a >> different kind of chip. > > Is this officially supported? Have you tested before posting? > If no then there should not be any argument for adding this support > assuming this can possibly be useful or experimental. >
I have tested this on the -EVM and will not test this on other boards. The type of board used is unrelated to adding boot authentication. This is not a new chip or board, it is a configuration change defconfig only. (If we could include other defconfigs like we can DTB files then this defconfig would include the regular defconfig and add a few lines. This would be useful for merging all the am335x/am43xx defconfig variations that have started to get rather out of sync with each other). Think if I added an I2C driver, there would be no need to test it on every board U-Boot supports, just one, and if it didn't work on some board that would be a bug against the board, not against the driver. I hope to at some point merge the HS and non-HS defconfigs, adding any delta between the two, without a specific reason, only delays this and will create a future support burden. Andrew > Thanks and regards, > Lokesh > _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot