Hi Nishanth!
On November 4, 2023 thus sayeth Nishanth Menon:
> With the upcoming folder separation, there is no further need to depend
> on am625-binman.dtsi. Duplicate the existing definitions to u-boot.dtsi
> and r5.dts as appropriate.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <n...@ti.com>
Reviewed-by: Bryan Brattlof <b...@ti.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/dts/k3-am625-beagleplay-u-boot.dtsi | 160 +++++++++++++++++--
> arch/arm/dts/k3-am625-r5-beagleplay.dts | 39 +++++
> 2 files changed, 184 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
...
> -&spl_am625_sk_dtb_unsigned {
> - filename = SPL_AM625_BEAGLEPLAY_DTB;
> -};
> + ti-spl_unsigned {
> + filename = "tispl.bin_unsigned";
If all of the beagle-plays are using the GP security variant shouldn't
we remove the _unsigned?
> + pad-byte = <0xff>;
> +
...
> -&am625_sk_dtb_unsigned {
> - filename = AM625_BEAGLEPLAY_DTB;
> + u-boot_unsigned {
> + filename = "u-boot.img_unsigned";
And here? I don't really have an opinion either way. Just curious if
we've thought about that.
> + pad-byte = <0xff>;
> +
~Bryan
