Hello Tom, Simon, On Wed, 19 Feb 2014 16:11:11 -0500 Tom Rini <tr...@ti.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 11:28:25AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > > Useful rules in scripts/Makefile.lib allows us to easily > > generate a device tree blob and wrap it in assembly code. > > > > We do not need to parse a linker script to get output format and arch. > > > > This commit deletes ./u-boot.dtb since it is a copy of dts/dt.dtb. > > > > Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamad...@jp.panasonic.com> > > Applied to u-boot/master, thanks! > > -- > Tom Ditto. Possibly it was missed because Simon and I were discussing in version 2 thread. > > > > > > Besides, dts/dt.dtb is a prerequisite of dts/dt.dtb.S > > > when CONFIG_OF_EMBED is enabled. > > > > > > I believe keeping dts/dt.dtb is reasonable enough. > > > > > > Better to keep both? > > > > Yes I think so. > > > OK. > I will revive ./u-boot.dtb and post a new version. > > And I will send it as a single patch > dropping 2/3 and 3/3. > Do you think it's better? > > Many kbuild-related patches are being stuck on patchwork > and my local branch is getting messed up. > I don't want to delay this patch any more. I was planning to post a new version. But before that, version 3 was applied. So, what should I do? Shall I post a follow-up patch to revive a device tree at the top directory (./u-boot.dtb) ? Best Regards Masahiro Yamada _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
