Hi Masahiro, On 23 March 2018 at 09:57, Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masah...@socionext.com> wrote: > Hi Simon, > > > 2018-03-23 23:31 GMT+09:00 Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>: >> Hi Masahiro, >> >> On 21 March 2018 at 03:03, Masahiro Yamada >> <yamada.masah...@socionext.com> wrote: >>> fdt_region APIs are not part of libfdt. They are U-Boot extension >>> for the verified boot. Split the declartions related to fdt_region >>> out ot <fdt_region.h>. This allows <linux/libfdt.h> to become a >>> simple wrapper file, like Linux does. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masah...@socionext.com> >>> --- >>> >>> common/fdt_region.c | 1 + >>> common/image-sig.c | 1 + >>> include/fdt_region.h | 303 >>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> include/linux/libfdt.h | 299 >>> ------------------------------------------------ >>> tools/fdtgrep.c | 1 + >>> tools/image-host.c | 1 + >>> 6 files changed, 307 insertions(+), 299 deletions(-) >>> create mode 100644 include/fdt_region.h >> >> I think moving the code into a separate header is fine, but I'm not >> keen on putting the implementation in common/ as it is a feature of >> libfdt. How does this actually help us? > > I want to clarify the boundary > between the upstream code and U-Boot own code. > > > If somebody tries to put new code into lib/libfdt/, > he is doing wrong.
Will still do have some patches locally that are not fully upstream, at least last time I looked. I'll take another look. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
