On 01.06.16 16:20, Michal Simek wrote:
> On 1.6.2016 16:12, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 01.06.16 15:08, Michal Simek wrote:
>>> Nand and QSPI are not defined now but this will be extended.
>>> Based on selected bootmode boot_targets are rewritten.
>>> Patch also contains detection if variables are saved. If yes don't
>>> rewrite boot_targets variable.
>>>
>>> Also move variable setup to the end of file because SCSI needs to be
>>> defined before others macros are using it.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.si...@xilinx.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Patch depends on
>>> "env: Setup GD_FLG_ENV_DEFAULT flag when default environment are used"
>>>
>>> ---
>>> board/xilinx/zynqmp/zynqmp.c | 20 +++++++++-----
>>> include/configs/xilinx_zynqmp.h | 59
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>>> 2 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/board/xilinx/zynqmp/zynqmp.c b/board/xilinx/zynqmp/zynqmp.c
>>> index 4623cd49e9c7..46c332215b6b 100644
>>> --- a/board/xilinx/zynqmp/zynqmp.c
>>> +++ b/board/xilinx/zynqmp/zynqmp.c
>>> @@ -215,6 +215,11 @@ int board_late_init(void)
>>> u32 reg = 0;
>>> u8 bootmode;
>>>
>>> + if (!(gd->flags & GD_FLG_ENV_DEFAULT)) {
>>> + debug("Saved variables - Skipping\n");
>>> + return 0;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> reg = readl(&crlapb_base->boot_mode);
>>> bootmode = reg & BOOT_MODES_MASK;
>>>
>>> @@ -222,31 +227,32 @@ int board_late_init(void)
>>> switch (bootmode) {
>>> case JTAG_MODE:
>>> puts("JTAG_MODE\n");
>>> - setenv("modeboot", "jtagboot");
>>> + setenv("boot_targets", "pxe dhcp");
>>
>> Is there a particular reason you're overwriting the boot_targets rather
>> than prepending them?
>>
>> If I plug in an SD card with U-Boot on it, but my OS is on a SATA
>> attached disk (which is how I currently use the ZynqMP), this would set
>> the boot_targets to SD rather than "SD first, default list later".
>>
>> If we instead do something like
>>
>> boot_targets = "pxe dhcp " + getenv(boot_targets);
>>
>> we would maintain a workable fallback path. Yes, we might check a target
>> device twice, but since we know that it fails I don't think it's too
>> much of a problem.
>
> No problem to do it but maybe in mmc0 case we should also remove mmc0
> from boot_targets which is already there.
If you want to write the code for that, sure :).
Alex
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
