My understanding was that we wanted to go the other way and have all boards have failover.
Kconfig doesn't support >1 image per build right now. This merely moves abuild to the same state, to simplify development.
If Koenig doesn't support fallback and normal yet, maybe that should come first.
We might want to have "something like failover". We might want to have "something like fallback and normal". But we will have to reconsider what exactly we want.
I like the cleanliness of having the early setup and image selection done separately. It made the s2895 code much easier for me to follow.
In my opinion such changes are easier if the tree is as uniform as possible.
Agreed.
Right now, there's failover style (k8 and fam10) and fallback/normal style (everything else). Moving from the latter to the former is harder than the other way around.
In general removing features is easier than adding them. Will this make it easier to add it later?
Thanks, Myles