Hi Sumit, On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 5:34 AM Sumit Garg <sumit.g...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 at 20:48, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 3:03 PM Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 07:20:55PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote: > > > > > > > Prerquisite > > > > ----------- > > > > > > > > This patch series requires devicetree-rebasing git repo to be added as a > > > > subtree to the main U-boot repo via: > > > > > > > > $ git subtree add --prefix devicetree-rebasing \ > > > > > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/devicetree/devicetree-rebasing.git > > > > \ > > > > v6.6-dts --squash > > > > > > So, I've played with subtree a little and I think this is the right way > > > forward in these cases. If anyone wants to take a look at how this works > > > in practice, take a look at: > > > https://source.denx.de/u-boot/u-boot/-/commits/WIP/u-boot-with-devicetree-rebasing-since-v6.1/?ref_type=heads > > > In that tree I started with the v6.1-dts tag, sync'd all the configs (to > > > have an example of a normal commit) and then did a merge of each tag > > > until v6.6-dts, so provide some history. And git log looks like what I > > > want to see, the squash commit has clear references to what we are > > > getting and I make a merge commit that says what I did. If you pull the > > > tree and checkout the branch, all the code is right there already, > > > nothing further to do. Same with tarball releases. The only thing I > > > don't like is the size growth there, but we'll reclaim some of it when > > > we delete our obsolete bindings, and then obsolete dts files. > > > > I spent a bit of time with subtree as well, as part of reviewing this > > series, using the instructions Sumit provided. It seems OK to me. We > > have to accept that it adds code and there will be changes/churn, but > > it is not too different to accepting patches on those files within > > U-Boot. We will bring in files which U-Boot doesn't use, but U-Boot > > does support a good proportion of the boards supported by Linux, so I > > don't see that as a big cost. > > > > From my experimentation, subtrees seem to have no impact on buildman, > > which is great. Am I missing anything? > > No it shouldn't cause any regression on existing tools/CI/build > systems. It is just a version controlled way of importing third party > source code as a tarball. > > > > > I still worry about the board-level 'switch' between U-Boot DT and > > upstream ones. I believe that should be at the SoC level instead. > > > > Probably I wasn't clear enough in my earlier replies but this series > motivates for a SoC level switch only. Patch #7 is essentially a > switch for Amlogic meson-gxbb SoC and its derived boards.
OK good...but that's not quite what I mean. You have a fragment like this in multiple defconfig files: +CONFIG_OF_UPSTREAM=y +CONFIG_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE="amlogic/meson-gxbb-odroidc2" instead, OF_UPSTREAM should be enabled via 'imply' for the SoC, in the Kconfig. We should not have to specify the filename like this. It is laborious and error-prone. Regards, Simon
