Hi Michael
On 27-Mar-24 8:03 PM, Michael Walle wrote:
Hi,
On Wed Mar 27, 2024 at 8:01 AM CET, Neha Malcom Francis wrote:
On 26/03/24 19:18, Michael Walle wrote:
On Fri Mar 22, 2024 at 2:10 PM CET, Neha Malcom Francis wrote:
Clean up templatized boot binaries for all K3 boards. This includes modifying the k3-binman.dtsi to use SPL_BOARD_DTB, BOARD_DESCRIPTION and UBOOT_BOARD_DESCRIPTION from the files that include it to further reuse code.
All k3-<soc>-binman.dtsi will contain only templates. Only required boot binaries can be built from the templates in the boards' respective -u-boot.dtsi file (or k3-<board>-binman.dtsi if it exists). This allows clear distinction between the SoC common stuff vs. what is additionally needed to boot up a specific board.
I appreciate the cleanup. But as far as I can see, a board might only have one device tree. How would that work if the uboot proper must support multiple device trees?
From the discussions that took place in the mailing list [1] the consensus seems to be to not focus on multiple devicetree support as it leads to confusion for downstream users.
What are users in this regard? I don't think you'd confuse developers.
Anyway, I'm planning on upstreaming a TI board which will have different memory configurations and different variants of the board.
I am assuming you are reusing an existing TI SoC?
And on top of that, it will just be a base board and there will likely be some carrier device trees (overlay? I'm not sure yet).
As far as I can tell, you've put the memory configuration into the device tree, so I'll probably need to switch between them somehow.
The "k3-<soc>-ddr.dtsi" file will be present in your k3-<board>r5.dts which makes sense, the memory configuration depends on the board.
Also, regarding the board variants, I'll probably need to choose between multiple device trees. That is invisible to the user, because u-boot will choose the correct DTB according a board strapping, which btw. works really fine, see for example (boards/kontron/sl28/spl.c:board_fit_config_name_match).
Again, this is assuming that there is some HW blown register available for the board to use (or in our earlier K3 case, the EEPROM) but that is not necessarily true every time.
I don't think it makes much sense to hardcode your generic *-binman.dtsi to just one FIT configuration. I'd rather see a split between generic things which are shared across all boards and board specifics, like the FIT configuration. I mean I could just copy all
Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that you would want to add more FDT blobs in the *-binman.dtsi correct? That is still possible, adding another "fdt-1" and "conf-1" in the
Something like this in your <board>-u-boot.dtsi,
tispl { insert-template = <&ti_spl>; fit { images { fdt-1 { ... }; }; configurations { conf-1 { ... }; }; }; };
provided you have the support to handle this multi-dtb FIT. But as far as reusing the k3-binman.dtsi and k3-<soc>-binman.dtsi goes; you should be able to do it.
the binman and tiboot3.bin and tispl.bin magic and put it into my own "-u-boot.dtsi". But I'm not sure that will make things any better.
-michael