| Message ID | 1345310726-21567-1-git-send-email-otavio@ossystems.com.br |
|---|---|
| State | Awaiting Upstream |
| Delegated to: | Stefano Babic |
| Headers | show |
Dear Otavio Salvador, > The elftosb call needs to use a target param specific for i.MX28. This > patch allow for later addition of i.MX233. > > Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br> > --- > Changes in v2: > - fix Makefile according > - move u-boot.bd to u-boot-imx28.bd > > Makefile | 5 ++++- > arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/{u-boot.bd => u-boot-imx28.bd} | 0 > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > rename arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/{u-boot.bd => u-boot-imx28.bd} (100%) > > diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile > index f6471e2..1df4c1d 100644 > --- a/Makefile > +++ b/Makefile > @@ -452,8 +452,11 @@ $(obj)u-boot.ais: $(obj)spl/u-boot-spl.bin > $(obj)u-boot.bin cat $(obj)spl/u-boot-spl-pad.ais $(obj)u-boot.bin > \ > $(obj)u-boot.ais > > +# Specify the target for use in elftosb call > +ELFTOSB_TARGET-$(CONFIG_MX28) = imx28 > + > $(obj)u-boot.sb: $(obj)u-boot.bin $(obj)spl/u-boot-spl.bin > - elftosb -zdf imx28 -c $(TOPDIR)/$(CPUDIR)/$(SOC)/u-boot.bd \ > + elftosb -zdf $(ELFTOSB_TARGET-y) -c > $(TOPDIR)/$(CPUDIR)/$(SOC)/u-boot-$(ELFTOSB_TARGET-y).bd \ -o > $(obj)u-boot.sb > > # On x600 (SPEAr600) U-Boot is appended to U-Boot SPL. > diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/u-boot.bd > b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/u-boot-imx28.bd similarity index 100% > rename from arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/u-boot.bd > rename to arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/u-boot-imx28.bd I think we should try and see if the mx28 and mx23 .bd can't be converged together too. Remind me in the evening (~4-5 hours from now) to try it. Best regards, Marek Vasut
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> wrote: > I think we should try and see if the mx28 and mx23 .bd can't be converged > together too. Remind me in the evening (~4-5 hours from now) to try it. We can try but mx23 cannot use the ivt helper; so we ended having a specific file for each processor. If we can get those merged, good.
Dear Otavio Salvador, > On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think we should try and see if the mx28 and mx23 .bd can't be converged > > together too. Remind me in the evening (~4-5 hours from now) to try it. > > We can try but mx23 cannot use the ivt helper; so we ended having a > specific file for each processor. Ooooh, that's correct. > If we can get those merged, good. Best regards, Marek Vasut
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote: > Dear Otavio Salvador, > >> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> wrote: >> > I think we should try and see if the mx28 and mx23 .bd can't be converged >> > together too. Remind me in the evening (~4-5 hours from now) to try it. >> >> We can try but mx23 cannot use the ivt helper; so we ended having a >> specific file for each processor. > > Ooooh, that's correct. > >> If we can get those merged, good. So; what we should do? Do you think this can be merged as is?
Am 19/08/2012 00:28, schrieb Otavio Salvador: > On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote: >> Dear Otavio Salvador, >> >>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> I think we should try and see if the mx28 and mx23 .bd can't be converged >>>> together too. Remind me in the evening (~4-5 hours from now) to try it. >>> >>> We can try but mx23 cannot use the ivt helper; so we ended having a >>> specific file for each processor. >> >> Ooooh, that's correct. >> >>> If we can get those merged, good. > > So; what we should do? Do you think this can be merged as is? > IMHO yes and I will do it, if one of you don't stop me... Stefano
Dear stefano babic, > Am 19/08/2012 00:28, schrieb Otavio Salvador: > > On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote: > >> Dear Otavio Salvador, > >> > >>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> I think we should try and see if the mx28 and mx23 .bd can't be > >>>> converged together too. Remind me in the evening (~4-5 hours from > >>>> now) to try it. > >>> > >>> We can try but mx23 cannot use the ivt helper; so we ended having a > >>> specific file for each processor. > >> > >> Ooooh, that's correct. > >> > >>> If we can get those merged, good. > > > > So; what we should do? Do you think this can be merged as is? > > IMHO yes and I will do it, if one of you don't stop me... Yes please, throw it in the machine! :-) Acked-by: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> > Stefano Best regards, Marek Vasut
On 18/08/2012 19:25, Otavio Salvador wrote: > The elftosb call needs to use a target param specific for i.MX28. This > patch allow for later addition of i.MX233. > > Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br> > --- > Changes in v2: > - fix Makefile according > - move u-boot.bd to u-boot-imx28.bd > > Makefile | 5 ++++- > arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/{u-boot.bd => u-boot-imx28.bd} | 0 > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > rename arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/{u-boot.bd => u-boot-imx28.bd} (100%) > > diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile > index f6471e2..1df4c1d 100644 > --- a/Makefile > +++ b/Makefile > @@ -452,8 +452,11 @@ $(obj)u-boot.ais: $(obj)spl/u-boot-spl.bin $(obj)u-boot.bin > cat $(obj)spl/u-boot-spl-pad.ais $(obj)u-boot.bin > \ > $(obj)u-boot.ais > > +# Specify the target for use in elftosb call > +ELFTOSB_TARGET-$(CONFIG_MX28) = imx28 > + > $(obj)u-boot.sb: $(obj)u-boot.bin $(obj)spl/u-boot-spl.bin > - elftosb -zdf imx28 -c $(TOPDIR)/$(CPUDIR)/$(SOC)/u-boot.bd \ > + elftosb -zdf $(ELFTOSB_TARGET-y) -c $(TOPDIR)/$(CPUDIR)/$(SOC)/u-boot-$(ELFTOSB_TARGET-y).bd \ > -o $(obj)u-boot.sb > > # On x600 (SPEAr600) U-Boot is appended to U-Boot SPL. > diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/u-boot.bd b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/u-boot-imx28.bd > similarity index 100% > rename from arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/u-boot.bd > rename to arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/u-boot-imx28.bd > Applied to u-boot-imx, thanks. Best regards, Stefano Babic
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index f6471e2..1df4c1d 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -452,8 +452,11 @@ $(obj)u-boot.ais: $(obj)spl/u-boot-spl.bin $(obj)u-boot.bin cat $(obj)spl/u-boot-spl-pad.ais $(obj)u-boot.bin > \ $(obj)u-boot.ais +# Specify the target for use in elftosb call +ELFTOSB_TARGET-$(CONFIG_MX28) = imx28 + $(obj)u-boot.sb: $(obj)u-boot.bin $(obj)spl/u-boot-spl.bin - elftosb -zdf imx28 -c $(TOPDIR)/$(CPUDIR)/$(SOC)/u-boot.bd \ + elftosb -zdf $(ELFTOSB_TARGET-y) -c $(TOPDIR)/$(CPUDIR)/$(SOC)/u-boot-$(ELFTOSB_TARGET-y).bd \ -o $(obj)u-boot.sb # On x600 (SPEAr600) U-Boot is appended to U-Boot SPL.
The elftosb call needs to use a target param specific for i.MX28. This patch allow for later addition of i.MX233. Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br> --- Changes in v2: - fix Makefile according - move u-boot.bd to u-boot-imx28.bd Makefile | 5 ++++- arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/{u-boot.bd => u-boot-imx28.bd} | 0 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) rename arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/{u-boot.bd => u-boot-imx28.bd} (100%) diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/u-boot.bd b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/u-boot-imx28.bd similarity index 100% rename from arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/u-boot.bd rename to arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/mxs/u-boot-imx28.bd