Tom, On 22/02/19 5:00 AM, Tom Rini wrote: > On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 01:33:50PM +0530, Faiz Abbas wrote: >> Hi Tom, >> >> On 19/02/19 8:45 PM, Tom Rini wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 08:25:29PM +0530, Faiz Abbas wrote: >>> >>>> With U-boot supporting environment in multiple places, enable only >>>> ENV_IS_IN_EMMC in U-boot. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Faiz Abbas <faiz_ab...@ti.com> >>> >>> Since we had previously and intentionally enabled FAT over raw MMC >>> location, why the switch back? Thanks! >>> >> >> This commit added this: >> >> commit fb69464eae1ec5aed2ee0e3a9e5533a31ad38bac >> Author: Maxime Ripard <maxime.rip...@free-electrons.com> >> Date: Tue Jan 23 21:17:01 2018 +0100 >> >> env: Allow to build multiple environments in Kconfig >> >> Now that we have everything in place in the code, let's allow to build >> multiple environments backend through Kconfig. >> >> Reviewed-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> >> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Majewski <lu...@denx.de> >> Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> >> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.rip...@free-electrons.com> >> >> >> Looking at the the cover letter for that series >> (https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/cover/842057/) , it seems to be an attempt >> to combat the increasing size of U-boot by permanently moving the >> environment to FAT partition. > > Well, not exactly. It's about allowing more than one location to be > enabled. For example, raw eMMC when that makes sense or FAT file when > that makes sense. If Lokesh ack's the change (or passes MAINTAINER over > to someone else who acks), OK, we'll do this. But there's intentional > reasons we've put it in a file in FAT before, even on this platform. > But maybe use cases have changed, and that's fine. >
Ok. The cover letter said they want to get rid of raw bootmode altogether and that is why I was concerned. Thanks for clearing it up. Regards, Faiz _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot