Hi Heinrich, On Sat, 8 Mar 2025 at 05:07, Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.g...@gmx.de> wrote: > > On 3/6/25 01:25, Simon Glass wrote: > > Rather than holding the state in the implementation code, move it to the > > command code. The state is now passed to the implementation functions > > and can there (with future work) be pass in from bootstd, without going > > Nits > %s/pass/passsed/ > > > through the commands. > > One of our (not yet achieved) development targets is to be able to build > without a command line interface.
This is actually possible with bootstd today, at least with some bootmeths. > Moving the bootm state to cmd/ sounds > like going into a contrary direction. It is passed from cmd/ to the implementation, so that (in future) bootstd can pass it in, without needing the cmd/ code. > > Maybe it is just the commit message that is not clear enough. Can you suggest an update? > > Best regards > > Heinrich > > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > > --- > > > > (no changes since v1) > > > > arch/x86/include/asm/zimage.h | 22 +++++----- > > arch/x86/lib/zimage.c | 75 +++++++++++++++++------------------ > > cmd/bootflow.c | 5 ++- > > cmd/x86/zboot.c | 20 ++++++---- > > include/bootm.h | 8 +++- > > 5 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-) > > [..] Regards, SImon
