From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Glass Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 22:12:30 -0800 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/3] dts: re-write dts/Makefile more simply with Kbuild In-Reply-To: <20140219150636.A14F.AA925319@jp.panasonic.com> References: <20140218182707.A132.AA925319@jp.panasonic.com> <20140219150636.A14F.AA925319@jp.panasonic.com> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi Masahiro, On 18 February 2014 22:06, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > Hello Simon, > > > On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 21:45:12 -0800 > Simon Glass wrote: > >> Hi Masahiro, >> >> On 18 February 2014 01:27, Masahiro Yamada wrote: >> > Hello Simon, >> > >> > >> > >> >> > Useful rules in scripts/Makefile.lib allows us to easily >> >> > generate a device tree blob and wrap it in assembly code. >> >> > >> >> > We do not need to parse a linker script to get output format and arch. >> >> > >> >> > This commit deletes ./u-boot.dtb since it is a copy of dts/dt.dtb >> >> >> >> I'd rather have the former and delete the latter temporary file as >> >> part of the build. u-boot.dtb is currently a build output. >> > >> > >> > This is what I have said in the thread >> > Re: [PATCH] dts: re-write dts/Makefile more simply with Kbuild >> > >> > We must keep dts/dt.dtb to suppress the re-generation of dts/dt.dtb. >> >> OK. From memory when I did this, it was just a temporary file which >> was used to create dts/dt.o. Make deleted it at the end of the build, >> I think. But I may remember wrong, and it doesn't matter anyway. > > I think dts/dt.o was deleted at the end > only when CONFIG_OF_SEPARATE=y > by the following rule. > > $(obj)u-boot.dtb: checkdtc $(obj)u-boot > $(MAKE) $(build) dts binary > mv $(obj)dts/dt.dtb $@ > > It moves, not copies dts/dt.dtb. > > >> > >> > Besides, dts/dt.dtb is a prerequisite of dts/dt.dtb.S >> > when CONFIG_OF_EMBED is enabled. >> > >> > I believe keeping dts/dt.dtb is reasonable enough. >> > >> > Better to keep both? >> >> Yes I think so. > > > OK. > I will revive ./u-boot.dtb and post a new version. > > And I will send it as a single patch > dropping 2/3 and 3/3. > Do you think it's better? > > Many kbuild-related patches are being stuck on patchwork > and my local branch is getting messed up. > I don't want to delay this patch any more. Agreed, I look forward to all your series being merged, a bit step forward for U-Boot. Regards, Simon