The SRM defines a very specific format for BeagleBone Black cape EEPROMs[1]. AFAIK, the only fields that are actually required are the Board Name and Version, which is used on boot to load the appropriate DTS file. If this is the case can we change the other fields to optional?
There’s a lot of great meta information in there, but if it’s not required can the documentation be changed to make it explicitly not required?
I remember populating this info for my XBee Cape, only to find that it is not used at all. I think it is still a good idea to have the info in there in case it is really used in the future. In theory it should be possible to have the cape configured without the need for a DTB file for each cape.
I remember populating this info for my XBee Cape, only to find that it
is not used at all. I think it is still a good idea to have the info
in there in case it is really used in the future. In theory it should
be possible to have the cape configured without the need for a DTB
file for each cape.
The data in there is useful and I can think of some other useful data,
like a link to the elinux site.
But if I put my manufacturer hat on, I want to know what's required and
what's recommended. For example, the CryptoCape doesn't populate the
week the board was made [1]. SparkFun uses it's own system AFIAK.
I think that the EEPROM Spec, as written, doesn't match current
practice. Nice-to-haves are nice-to-have, but it would be nice if that
was indicated in the spec.
Josh
[1] This is a result of my recommendation, so feel free to blame me, not
SparkFun on this one.
I wrote the spec. This is what I wanted in there. I don’t control what the SW population is able to handle. I prefer not to make a statement that all of sudden may become false based on a SW implementation event.
