Hi Stephen,
2014-09-09 0:58 GMT+09:00 Stephen Warren <swar...@wwwdotorg.org>: > On 09/08/2014 09:57 AM, Masahiro YAMADA wrote: >> >> Hi Stephen, >> >> >> >> 2014-09-09 0:04 GMT+09:00 Stephen Warren <swar...@wwwdotorg.org>: >> >>> I don't believe this is the correct approach; CONFIG_OF_CONTROL isn't a >>> user-configurable option, and hence shouldn't show up in *_defconfig. >>> "select OF_CONTROL" in a Kconfig file probably makes sense though. >> >> >> >> I think it depends on the board (SoC). >> >> In my understanding, Zynq boards should work with/without Device Tree >> control. >> (Moreover, Zynq boards work with/without SPL) >> >> At least as for Zynq, >> CONFIG_OF_CONTROL ( and CONFIG_SPL too) is a user-configurable option. >> >> (Michal, please correct me if I am wrong.) >> >> >> I am not familiar with Tegra SoCs, but >> do Tegra boards always Device Tree? ( and only work with SPL ?) >> >> If so, >> >> config TEGRA >> select SPL >> select OF_CONTROL >> >> looks better? > > > That looks correct for Tegra. > OK. I will send v2. CONFIG_OF_CONTROL in tegra defconfigs will go away. (BTW, I forgot to mention a famous board; beaglebone black. am335_boneblack_defconfig disables CONFIG_OF_CONTROL, whereas am335_boneblack_vboot_defconfig enables it. ) -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
