Hi, Am Fr., 13. Aug. 2021 um 14:34 Uhr schrieb Fabio Estevam <feste...@gmail.com>: > > Hi Tim, > > [Adding Marek] > > On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 6:53 PM Tim Harvey <thar...@gateworks.com> wrote: > > > With respect to moving to binman, I'm all for it but I'm wondering why > > other boards have elected to move from a monolithic flash.bin > > including the SPL and u-boot.itb pre-binman to post-binman where > > flash.bin is just the SPL. I'm not sure why users should be hit with a > > change like that... why are people not having binman produce a > > flash.bin that was equivalent to pre-binman? > > Yes, fully agree. > > Peng, > > After the adoption of binman, both flash.bin and u-boot.itb need to be > flashed to the boot media. > > This breaks user experience, distro integration, etc, which is not good. > > Can we have binman generate a single bootable flash.bin binary (which > contains flash.bin + u-boot.itb) again > to keep compatibility and avoid breakage?
Maybe I'm wrong or I do not fully understand the limitation you're talking about, but as far as I understand the output (flash.bin) from the ronetix board [1] was generated using binman and includes all necessary parts. Is this right? [1] https://source.denx.de/u-boot/u-boot/-/blob/master/arch/arm/dts/imx8mq-cm-u-boot.dtsi -- Heiko