On 1/21/21 11:41 AM, Michael Walle wrote: > Hi, > > Am 2021-01-21 11:23, schrieb Michal Simek: >>>> Back to your case. Board is cheap which is not all the time case for >>>> any >>>> xilinx board but you have only uart, sd and partially described >>>> ethernet >>>> which doesn't work without PL. Is it worth to have this described? >>> >>> I got your point. But it is at least a jump start for the users if that >>> board boots out of the box. And yes, its unfortunate, that ethernet >>> just works if the PL is configured. This is already done by the >>> bootloader, because there I do have the same problem. >> >> Zynq/ZynqMP boards can use U-Boot SPL. "Advantage" of this solution >> especially for Zynq is that in u-boot there is open a way for adding >> ps7_init file which is determined by device tree name. >> I think it would make sense to add these DTs and also ps7_init to U-Boot >> project and wire it up with zynq_virt platform and then you can boot >> Linux with using U-Boot's DT pointed by $fdtcontroladdr. >> Then you will get support from scratch to be able to boot. > > I already have patches for u-boot (using SPL). But my impression was > that linux is the master for the device trees. Esp. if there are some > problems with the board its often useful to have an in-tree device > tree. > > What is the difference between this board and the other zynq boards > in the kernel? > > In any case, please make this decision now: will you accept this > device tree or not? If you promise to regularly test it I am fine with it. Thanks, Michal
