There seems to be an overlap between using the device tree and U-Boot, as far as defining how the board config information is fed to Linux.
Upstreaming U-Boot is being discussed at and there is 'pressure' on Adapteva to sign off and include Parallella U-Boot in the mainstream. Before that's done can we look at what
should be in there??
What should be in the Device Tree and what should be in the U-Boot config?
A recompilation of the U-Boot is not something to be taken lightly because that involves the official U-Boot Git repositories and we could soon end up with different boot builds. (Looking at what the U-Boot files includes, it seems it's on the road to World Domination
)
OTOH, Device tree configs are meant to be flexible, and the purpose is to avoid having multiple kernel or boot builds. Any changes are local to Parallella/Adapteva - or the developer/customer/me. The more that can be moved to the Device Tree the better!
Some board parameters are 'Hard' / fixed while others are more 'Soft', e.g. Total physical memory (1 GB) is 'Hard' but the amount that is made available to the OS (32MB) is 'Soft'. There may be other parameters - but that's the one I'm currently interested in. (So why is that 'memory' device ignored/not effective??)
This is relevant to FPGA Source reorganisation: the capability to reconfigure FPGA means that there
may be other 'Hard' config parameters that
may be impacted. So I really do believe it's worth having a good look at this - before the U-Boot upstreaming takes place.
tery