2016-01-29 12:24 GMT+09:00 Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>: > At present u-boot.bin holds the plain U-Boot binary without the device tree. > This is somewhat annoying since you need either u-boot.bin or u-boot-dtb.bin > depending on whether device tree is used. > > This series adjusts the build such that u-boot.bin includes a device tree if > enabled, and the plain binary is in u-boot-nodtb.bin. For now u-boot-dtb.bin > remains the same. > > This should be acceptable since: > > - without OF_CONTROL, u-boot.bin still does not include a device tree > - with OF_CONTROL, u-boot-dtb.bin does not change > > The main impact is to build systems which are set up to use u-boot.bin as > the output file and then add a device tree. These will have to change to use > u-boot-nodtb.bin instead. > > The original decision to use a separate u-boot-dtb.bin was aimed at allowing > any device tree file to be concatenated to the u-boot.bin image after the > build. However this no-longer seems so important. More important is the > convenience of using the same output file regardless of the setting for > OF_CONTROL. > > Changes in v2: > - Rewrite this commit based on tegra feedback > - Update based on previous changes > - Fix the update_filename in MCV > - Tweak the tegra rule slightly > > Simon Glass (7): > tegra: Clarify generation of -nodtb file with OF_CONTROL > fdt: Build a U-Boot binary without device tree > fdt: Build an SPL binary without device tree > tegra: Always build a boot image with the same filename > socfpga: Simplify Makefile filenames > Makefile: Make u-boot.img the same as u-boot-dtb.img > Makefile: Drop unnecessary -dtb suffixes >
The basic concept is OK with me. I left some comments in each patch. -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
