(ping Jagan)
On 06/06/2018 10:51 AM, Martin Kelly wrote:
On 06/06/2018 07:58 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 11:15:34AM -0700, Martin Kelly wrote:
[snip as the thread is getting long]
On 06/04/2018 01:21 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 10:16:32AM -0700, Martin Kelly wrote:
On 06/01/2018 04:05 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
I can see the issues with new defconfigs, but I'm not sure if it
will really
be that bad. If we apply this patch against sunxi master, then
shouldn't new
patches get tested and rebased against it? In that case, if they
have not
set DEFAULT_FDT_FILE, it will default to "", the boards won't boot,
and the
mistake must be fixed prior to merging.
Unless one has tested it with a version prior to your patch, and sends
it. Not a lot of people are testing with the next branch in the
various trees.
Alternatively if we add the Kconfig boolean, we need to worry about
what
happens when people have DEFAULT_FDT_FILE set already. I guess we
would need
to default the new Kconfig boolean to be custom in order to keep those
configs from breaking. But if we do that, sunxi will break by
default (since
sunxi configs don't have the value set).
What would you suggest the default value of the new boolean to be?
config DEFAULT_FDT_FILE_USE_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE
bool "whatever"
default y if ARCH_ROCKCHIP
default y if ARCH_SUNXI
and in the headers
#ifdef CONFIG_DEFAULT_FDT_FILE_USE_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE
#define CONFIG_DEFAULT_FDT_FILE CONFIG_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE ".dtb"
#endif
And that's done.
I didn't know Kconfig can set different default values for each
architecture like that; that does indeed solve the problem. However,
I don't think it's a good idea to have sunxi use an alternate
mechanism than the other boards.
To be clear, are you proposing a general config option that would
apply to every board? In that case, the header logic would be in a
global header rather than a board-specific one.
Yes, that's what I had in mind.
Maxime
OK, I can see the merits of that, though I think there's tradeoffs both
ways.
Before I go ahead with a patch, Jagan: which approach would you prefer?
Jagan, do you prefer Maxime's proposed approach, or my original patch? I
am happy to go either way but want to confirm before proceeding.
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
