On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 10:26:07AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 17-12-15 10:21, Ian Campbell wrote: > >On Thu, 2015-12-17 at 07:40 +0100, Karsten Merker wrote: > >>On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 01:59:57PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > >>>2015-12-17 13:58 GMT+09:00 Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.c > >>>om>: > >>>>Hi, > >>>> > >>>>I noticed some well-maintained new SoC families still > >>>>define CONFIG_CMDLINE_TAG. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>For example, > >>[...] > >>>>include/configs/sunxi-common.h > >>>> > >>>> #define CONFIG_SETUP_MEMORY_TAGS > >>>> #define CONFIG_CMDLINE_TAG > >>>> #define CONFIG_INITRD_TAG > >>>> #define CONFIG_SERIAL_TAG > >> > >>>>Do they still use ATAGS, not device tree? > >> > >>Sunxi uses devicetree for mainline kernels, but AFAIK ATAG > >>support is necessary to enable booting legacy vendor kernels. > >>There is still new sunxi-based hardware sold today that comes > >>with legacy 3.4-based kernels. > > > >That legacy kernel is FEX (allwinners own description blob) based, I don't > >know to what extent that involves ATAGs in some way though. > > > >There are also people who use the 3.4 based fork from linux-sunxi.org, but > >I don't know if that is DT or ATAGS or FEX. > > > >A dependency on CONFIG_OLD_SUNXI_KERNEL_COMPAT might be an option depending > >on what the kernels need, Hans probably knows better than I do. > > The 3.4 based kernels use both ATAGS for things like memory size, and fex > for other hw config info. > > I'm not in favor of wrapping things in CONFIG_OLD_SUNXI_KERNEL_COMPAT, because > recent 3.4 based kernels can boot without that, and I believe that removing > the ATAG support will break this, without really buying us much.
+1. ATAG is also used iirc for some other operating systems, still. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
