Hi Tim, Hi Simon, [SNIP]
> > Heiko, > > You can add multi-dtb support to this so that it's usable by the other > imx8mn boards with the following: > diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/imx8mn-u-boot.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/imx8mn-u-boot.dtsi > index 7b591085a0be..af6697b1efbc 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/dts/imx8mn-u-boot.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/dts/imx8mn-u-boot.dtsi > @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ > > fit { > description = "Configuration to load ATF before > U-Boot"; > + fit,fdt-list = "of-list"; > #address-cells = <1>; > fit,external-offset = <CONFIG_FIT_EXTERNAL_OFFSET>; > > @@ -67,7 +68,7 @@ > }; > }; > > - fdt { > + @fdt-SEQ { > description = "NAME"; > type = "flat_dt"; > compression = "none"; > @@ -79,13 +80,13 @@ > }; > > configurations { > - default = "conf"; > + default = "@config-DEFAULT-SEQ"; > > - conf { > + binman_configuration: @config-SEQ { > description = "NAME"; > firmware = "uboot"; > loadables = "atf"; > - fdt = "fdt"; > + fdt = "fdt-SEQ"; > }; > }; > }; > > I don't mind sending this as a follow-up to your patch here. Since this patch moves the parts from the 2 imx8mn-evk boards to one "common" file it would be better to do more changes on that in a separate patch. > It looks like there are only the following boards in mainline that > would benefit from using this shared include: > imx8mn-beacon-kit-u-boot.dtsi > imx8mn-var-som-symphony-u-boot.dtsi > imx8mn-venice-u-boot.dtsi > > Have you compared the binman portions of imx8m{m,n,p}-u-boot.dtsi? No not yet. > There are a lot of differences due to different property ordering and > label/node naming conventions. I would like to see these normalized > but i'm not clear which is the best example to normalize to. > Specifically I don't know: > 1. what is the convention for property ordering in dt... is it simply > alphabetical order? > 2. have we settled on a convention for the blob naming, if so what is > the best example? I am not aware that there is a conventional here. But maybe simon can give some hints here. -- Heiko -- Heiko