Hi, Am Di., 17. Aug. 2021 um 05:56 Uhr schrieb Heiko Schocher <h...@denx.de>: > > Hello Fabio, > > On 16.08.21 17:21, Fabio Estevam wrote: > > After the convesion to binman in commit 8996e6b7c6a1 ("imx8mm_evk: switch > > to use binman to pack images"), it is necessary to flash both flash.bin and > > u-boot.itb to get a bootable system. Prior to this commit, only flash.bin > > was needed. > > > > Such new requirement breaks existing distro mechanisms to generate the > > final image because the extra u-boot.itb is now required. > > > > Generate a final flash.bin image that can be used again as a single > > bootable image to keep the original behavior. > > > > Suggested-by: Heiko Schocher <h...@denx.de> > > Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <feste...@denx.de> > > --- > > arch/arm/dts/imx8mm-evk-u-boot.dtsi | 15 +++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/imx8mm-evk-u-boot.dtsi > > b/arch/arm/dts/imx8mm-evk-u-boot.dtsi > > index f200afac9f..ad3056c7c8 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/dts/imx8mm-evk-u-boot.dtsi > > +++ b/arch/arm/dts/imx8mm-evk-u-boot.dtsi > > @@ -217,4 +217,19 @@ > > }; > > }; > > }; > > + > > + imx-boot { > > + filename = "flash.bin"; > > I am unsure here, if it makes sense to overwrite flash.bin with the > binary which contains SPL and u-boot.itb. May others want to use > them (as I currently use them for signing them) > > Why not imx-boot as image name as in NXP sources? > (Thats why I named it so in my "fast example approach")
Is it right that in that case a new u-boot makefile target has to be set? Currently flash.bin works because it is already set in "arch/arm/mach-imx/Makefile"? -- Heiko