On 12.07.16 14:45, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 12.07.2016 um 09:30 schrieb Alexander Graf:
>> On 12.07.16 06:21, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>> We do so for the EFI binary already and it aids debugging.
>>>
>>> Cc: Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de>
>>> ---
>>> include/config_distro_bootcmd.h | 4 ++++
>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h
>>> b/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h
>>> index 8f14457..0cf74e2 100644
>>> --- a/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h
>>> +++ b/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h
>>> @@ -149,6 +149,10 @@
>>> "${prefix}${dtb_prefix}" \
>>> "${dtb_vendor_prefix}" \
>>> "${efi_fdtfile}; then " \
>>> + "echo Found ${prefix}" \
>>
>> As mentioned in the other reply, I think this message is very useful,
>> but should contain the target device name as well, so that we don't need
>> to print out a message for every single partition we scan :).
>
> I originally had it that way, but remember that issues like with patches
> 4 and 5 will not lead to any Found message at all. Therefore I still
> prefer decoupling the two.
We do detect the case where we don't have a working fdt loaded already,
so we could probably print out the search paths there if we don't find a
working fdt?
> Btw where does the "reading efi/boot/bootaa64.efi" message come from?
> That one could be dropped as duplicate instead! :)
Phew. The "load" command maybe?
Alex
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
