Hi Tom, On Sat, 3 May 2025 at 18:58, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > On Fri, May 02, 2025 at 08:09:48PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Tom, > > > > On Fri, 2 May 2025 at 10:26, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 14:47:37 +0200, Caleb Connolly wrote: > > > > > > > Introduce a new event to signal that the live tree has been built, > > > > allowing boards to perform fixups on the tree before devices are bound. > > > > Crucially this allows for devices to be enabled or disabled, but also > > > > allows for properties that are parsed during the bind stage to be > > > > modified (such as dr_mode for dwc3). > > > > > > > > With this in place, mach-snapdragon is switched over to use the event > > > > and some hacky U-Boot specific DT overrides (which had to be undone > > > > prior to booting an image) are removed in favour of fixing up the > > > > livetree (which is not passed on to further boot stages). > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > Applied to u-boot/master, thanks! > > > > > > [1/8] event: signal when livetree has been built > > > commit: 993a9db918af451c68851522c8770e582b717629 > > > [2/8] mach-snapdragon: use EVT_OF_LIVE_INIT to apply DT fixups > > > commit: 5a1dfb27f9170d35a475ea8be46b5d7c037ee837 > > > [3/8] mach-snapdragon: of_fixup: skip disabled USB nodes > > > commit: 0ec337d03410a4a0b7402ae72968470cf63f0c55 > > > [4/8] mach-snapdragon: of_fixup: remove confusing log message > > > commit: a6cc4ef343dc39c17fd5b833d983aff2f26c94b7 > > > [5/8] mach-snapdragon: of_fixup: update comment > > > commit: 9bc7eef9bf58c4c1d453cba81060dc61375f5354 > > > [6/8] mach-snapdragon: of_fixup: set dr_mode for RB1/2 boards > > > commit: 3b983cf48e70ecb6aadca788d0d91a021340c802 > > > [7/8] clk/qcom: qcm2290: show clock name in set_rate() > > > commit: 229fd3f9a8d4dbaad7c9a2e9c1b62d14d0753b0b > > > [8/8] pinctrl: qcom: qcm2290: fix off by 1 in pin_count > > > commit: 2803a466a96153ab01c5789321e48397b6bae9c7 > > > -- > > > Tom > > > > > > > One of the patches in this series introduces the concept of two > > parallel devicetrees in U-Boot. So once we do move to livetree 'for > > real' it won't work. We did have a discussion on the series and I > > proposed a couple of alternatives, but have not heard back on those. > > > > As always, I don't mind what is applied so long as we can change it later. > > Yes, it seemed we had reached the point where there was confusion over > how things work, so we're going to move forward and see what's needed in > the future.
OK. I am not sure when I will get to doing more on the OF_LIVE migration, but it is a good reminder. Regards, Simon
