On 11/01/2013 11:29 AM, Vidya Sagar wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Stephen Warren [mailto:swar...@wwwdotorg.org] >> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 9:59 PM >> To: Vidya Sagar; u-boot@lists.denx.de >> Cc: Stephen Warren; Tom Warren >> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] tegra: allow build to succeed with SPL disabled >> >> On 10/31/2013 03:21 AM, Vidya Sagar wrote: >>> u-boot-dtb-tegra.bin and u-boot-nodtb-tegra.bin binaries are generated >>> only if the SPL build is enabled as they have dependency on SPL build >> >> Should they though? If there's no SPL, surely we still want to generate the >> same output filenames, so that consumers of the binaries don't have to care >> whether a particular board needs the SPL tacked onto the binary. >> >> In other words, rather than: >> >> u-boot-nodtb-tegra.bin == SPL + U-Boot >> u-boot-dtb-tegra.bin == SPL + U-Boot + DTB >> >> ... when SPL is disabled, shouldn't we generate: >> >> u-boot-nodtb-tegra.bin == U-Boot >> u-boot-dtb-tegra.bin == U-Boot + DTB >> >> That would require modifying the rules that generate those files not to >> include the SPL binary in the concatenation, rather than simply not >> generating those files at all. > > When the SPL build is disabled, we are already generating u-boot.bin and > u-boot-dtb.bin. > Do we really want to generate two more binaries with the same content but > with different names ?
Oh, I guess that the way u-boot-tegra-*.bin is a bit different to what I thought, so indeed if you just disable those, then the desired U-Boot+DTB files are still created. So, I guess it's fine the way you have it. It's a bit annoying that the output filenames are different based on whether you have SPL or not, but I guess I can make our flasher scripts cope with that easily enough. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
