On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) <jon.medhu...@linaro.org> wrote: > On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 13:46 -0700, Tom Rini wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 6:46 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) >> <jon.medhu...@linaro.org> wrote: >> > Extend the default boot sequence on Versatile Express to load a boot >> > script from MMC. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Jon Medhurst <jon.medhu...@linaro.org> >> >> Is there any interest in defining a common 'fancy' boot command? Over >> on beagleboard (and a few other eval boards) we are (or will be) >> doing, roughly: >> Is there mmc? { >> Can we load a bootscript? { >> load it, do it >> } >> Can we load uEnv.txt? { >> Did it set 'uenvcmd'? { >> Run it >> } >> } >> Did we load the kernel? { >> bootm it >> } >> } >> Try nand. >> >> And it's not hard to replace NAND with "whatever flash the board sets" > > It could make sense. However, the combinations of boot methods could get > quite big, e.g. do we include pxeboot, tftp?
Well, maybe we define some blocks (TRY_MMC, TRY_ENET, TRY_NAND, TRY_SPI, ...) ... > If everything was included in the common 'fancy boot' then some boards > would have to define boot methods (or stubs) for things they weren't > interested in. And, conversely, if fancy boot didn't include everything, > then other people would need to extend it. ... provide a few examples of the blocks strung together and have people string up what they need themselves, so long as it's an otherwise good idea to have complex default boot methods? -- Tom _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot