| Message ID | 1349315254-21151-31-git-send-email-troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Delegated to: | Stefano Babic |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Troy Kisky <troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> wrote: > The prompt is not appropriate if not running on > a mx6q processor. > > Signed-off-by: Troy Kisky <troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> But in this case the board name will change, no?
On 10/3/2012 8:00 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Troy Kisky > <troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> wrote: >> The prompt is not appropriate if not running on >> a mx6q processor. >> >> Signed-off-by: Troy Kisky <troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> > But in this case the board name will change, no? > No, patch 29/32 sets the new boards to use the same config file (mx6qsabrelite.h) only adding ",MX6DL" or ",MX6S" or ",MX6Q" to the end of the line in boards.cfg Troy
On 05/10/2012 01:28, Troy Kisky wrote: > On 10/3/2012 8:00 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Troy Kisky >> <troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> wrote: >>> The prompt is not appropriate if not running on >>> a mx6q processor. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Troy Kisky <troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> >> But in this case the board name will change, no? >> > No, patch 29/32 sets the new boards to use the same config file > (mx6qsabrelite.h) only adding ",MX6DL" or ",MX6S" or ",MX6Q" > to the end of the line in boards.cfg This means that CONFIG_MX6Dx is set. You can use it to set appropriately the prompt or use a more generic name including the board name, as "MX6SABRELITE U-Boot > ". The board is always the same, what is different is the SOC. I can compare this with a motherboard for a PC that can mount a dual or quad core. The board is always the same, and how many core are running is read in a different way (cat /proc/cpuinfo under Linux or get_cpu_rev in U-Boot with the patch you sent). Best regards, Stefano
On 10/8/2012 6:54 AM, Stefano Babic wrote: > On 05/10/2012 01:28, Troy Kisky wrote: >> On 10/3/2012 8:00 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Troy Kisky >>> <troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> wrote: >>>> The prompt is not appropriate if not running on >>>> a mx6q processor. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Troy Kisky <troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> >>> But in this case the board name will change, no? >>> >> No, patch 29/32 sets the new boards to use the same config file >> (mx6qsabrelite.h) only adding ",MX6DL" or ",MX6S" or ",MX6Q" >> to the end of the line in boards.cfg > This means that CONFIG_MX6Dx is set. You can use it to set appropriately > the prompt or use a more generic name including the board name, as > "MX6SABRELITE U-Boot > ". The board is always the same, what is I can live with "MX6SABRELITE U-Boot" but I prefer a plain "U-Boot". The rest seems a waste of screen real estate. The long u-boot commands are more likely to wrap. Anyone else have an opinion??? Thanks Troy
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Troy Kisky <troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> wrote: > I can live with "MX6SABRELITE U-Boot" but I prefer a plain "U-Boot". > The rest seems a waste of screen real estate. The long u-boot commands > are more likely to wrap. Anyone else have an opinion??? Agreed.
Am 08/10/2012 23:58, schrieb Troy Kisky: > On 10/8/2012 6:54 AM, Stefano Babic wrote: >> On 05/10/2012 01:28, Troy Kisky wrote: >>> On 10/3/2012 8:00 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >>>> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Troy Kisky >>>> <troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> wrote: >>>>> The prompt is not appropriate if not running on >>>>> a mx6q processor. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Troy Kisky <troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> >>>> But in this case the board name will change, no? >>>> >>> No, patch 29/32 sets the new boards to use the same config file >>> (mx6qsabrelite.h) only adding ",MX6DL" or ",MX6S" or ",MX6Q" >>> to the end of the line in boards.cfg >> This means that CONFIG_MX6Dx is set. You can use it to set appropriately >> the prompt or use a more generic name including the board name, as >> "MX6SABRELITE U-Boot > ". The board is always the same, what is > > I can live with "MX6SABRELITE U-Boot" but I prefer a plain "U-Boot". > The rest seems a waste of screen real estate. The long u-boot commands > are more likely to wrap. Personally agree, shorter is better. Regards, Stefano
On 10/08/2012 02:58 PM, Troy Kisky wrote: > On 10/8/2012 6:54 AM, Stefano Babic wrote: >> On 05/10/2012 01:28, Troy Kisky wrote: >>> On 10/3/2012 8:00 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >>>> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Troy Kisky >>>> <troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> wrote: >>>>> The prompt is not appropriate if not running on >>>>> a mx6q processor. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Troy Kisky <troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> >>>> But in this case the board name will change, no? >>>> >>> No, patch 29/32 sets the new boards to use the same config file >>> (mx6qsabrelite.h) only adding ",MX6DL" or ",MX6S" or ",MX6Q" >>> to the end of the line in boards.cfg >> This means that CONFIG_MX6Dx is set. You can use it to set appropriately >> the prompt or use a more generic name including the board name, as >> "MX6SABRELITE U-Boot > ". The board is always the same, what is > > I can live with "MX6SABRELITE U-Boot" but I prefer a plain "U-Boot". > The rest seems a waste of screen real estate. The long u-boot commands > are more likely to wrap. Anyone else have an opinion??? > I'm with you, for selfish reasons. When I write up instructions like these, things tend to wrap with the longer prompt (so I usually hand-edit them): http://boundarydevices.com/configuring-i-mx6-machines-different-screens-nitrogen6x-sabre-lite/#timesys The marketing value of MX6SABRELITE is pretty small when someone as one on their desk. Regards, Eric
On 10/08/2012 03:18 PM, stefano babic wrote: > Am 08/10/2012 23:58, schrieb Troy Kisky: >> On 10/8/2012 6:54 AM, Stefano Babic wrote: >>> On 05/10/2012 01:28, Troy Kisky wrote: >>>> On 10/3/2012 8:00 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >>>>> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Troy Kisky >>>>> <troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> wrote: >>>>>> The prompt is not appropriate if not running on >>>>>> a mx6q processor. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Troy Kisky<troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> >>>>> But in this case the board name will change, no? >>>>> >>>> No, patch 29/32 sets the new boards to use the same config file >>>> (mx6qsabrelite.h) only adding ",MX6DL" or ",MX6S" or ",MX6Q" >>>> to the end of the line in boards.cfg >>> This means that CONFIG_MX6Dx is set. You can use it to set appropriately >>> the prompt or use a more generic name including the board name, as >>> "MX6SABRELITE U-Boot> ". The board is always the same, what is >> >> I can live with "MX6SABRELITE U-Boot" but I prefer a plain "U-Boot". >> The rest seems a waste of screen real estate. The long u-boot commands >> are more likely to wrap. > > Personally agree, shorter is better. > Shh! Nobody tell the marketing folks!
diff --git a/include/configs/mx6qsabrelite.h b/include/configs/mx6qsabrelite.h index 8890e4c..8fd35a6 100644 --- a/include/configs/mx6qsabrelite.h +++ b/include/configs/mx6qsabrelite.h @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ /* Miscellaneous configurable options */ #define CONFIG_SYS_LONGHELP #define CONFIG_SYS_HUSH_PARSER -#define CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT "MX6QSABRELITE U-Boot > " +#define CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT "U-Boot > " #define CONFIG_AUTO_COMPLETE #define CONFIG_SYS_CBSIZE 256
The prompt is not appropriate if not running on a mx6q processor. Signed-off-by: Troy Kisky <troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> --- include/configs/mx6qsabrelite.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)