On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 11:29:04 +0530 Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvu...@ti.com> wrote:
> On 20/07/21 1:49 pm, Paul Barker wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 11:59:06 +0530 > > Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvu...@ti.com> wrote: > > > >> On 13/07/21 1:44 am, Paul Barker wrote: > >>> The function board_is_bone_lt() returns true for the BeagleBone Green, > >>> the BeagleBone Enhanced and the BeagleBone Black. Therefore when > >>> selecting which devicetree to use we must ensure that the more specific > >>> functions board_is_bbg1() and board_is_bben() are checked first > >>> otherwise all three devices would end up using the am335x-boneblack > >>> devicetree. This can be achieved by placing the relevant devicetree > >>> names (am335x-sancloud-bbe and am335x-bonegreen) before am335x-boneblack > >>> in CONFIG_OF_LIST. > >> > >> Such restrictions should be handled inside board_fit_config_name_match() > >> and > >> hiden from user configuration. Can you update the > >> board_fit_config_name_match() > >> instead of updating defconfig? > > > > Hi Lokesh, > > > > Apologies for the late reply, I lost most of last week due to illness. > > > > I first attempted to fix this by changing the order of things in > > `board_fit_config_name_match` but it had no effect. Looking at > > `fit_find_config_node` in `common/common_fit.c`, we loop through the > > list of dtbs and check each one in turn for a match. So to move > > am335x-bonegreen ahead of am335x-boneblack we need to change the order > > in which the dtbs are checked in `fit_find_config_node`. The simplest > > way I could find to do that is to change the order of the names in > > CONFIG_OF_LIST. > > ahh..ok got it. But still such constraints in config file is most likely will > not be maintained in future when someone touching the config. Because not > everyone knows this. > > Is it possible to create a new macro which is true only for bbb and use it > instead in board_fit_config_name_match? I'm happy to have a look for an alternative solution like that. The patch here is a quick fix though that can be applied as-is. Perhaps we should apply this and also look for an alternative implementation of `board_is_bone_lt`. If you want to leave this patch out for now, can we move ahead and merge the other patches in this series? Thanks, -- Paul Barker Principal Software Engineer SanCloud Ltd
pgpHIwevUYr0I.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
