On Thu, 3 Nov 2022 at 15:32, Quentin Schulz quentin.schulz@theobroma-systems.com wrote:
Hi Jagan,
On 11/3/22 07:19, Jagan Teki wrote:
rockchip-u-boot.dtsi has the FIT image for the final stage of binman image creation.
If the actual binman node is part of this dtsi then there are build issues to use optee as input to this final stage binman image since optee is built via another binman image creation unlike ATF built via tools like make_fit_atf.py.
binman: Filename 'u-boot.itb' not found in input pathFix this by separating binman FIT image in rockchip-binman.dtsi
My understanding is that this is a work-around for something that should be implemented in binman instead (e.g. dependency between images). If i'm not mistaken, what you're suggesting is to not build u-boot-rockchip.bin for some platforms? IIRC the plan for this binary was that it would apply to all Rockchip platforms, and this patch makes this "promise" go away.
Not really, no functionality is changed. It is just that we cannot create the final binman image for optee. It is not possible to implement in binman alone however if you want to add optee binman prior to the final binman can be solvable but it makes unnecessary ifdefs and maintaining many binman node definitions in one file seems confusing and difficult to maintain.
rockchip-u-boot.dtsi: binman node rockchip-binman.dtsi: binman FIT image node
The inclusion of rockchip-binman.dtsi is always to be last in included files as it has a FIT image node for final image creation.
You are not respecting this in your patch. Please update or remove this section if not required. (I assume you have this limitation because you use a binman phandle, meaning the node needs to be defined before).
Also, rockchip-u-boot.dtsi content is now literally: / { binman: binman { multiple-images; }; };
which is pretty much useless.
Since you want to work around your build issue, why just not include rockchip-u-boot.dtsi instead of moving part of it to another file without any added benefit (at least at first glance, I may be missing some context).
BTW, we were discussing some months ago on moving away from make_fit_atf.py to binman for all Rockchip platforms, c.f. the long discussion here: https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20220725172953.GD2029@begut/ So maybe we should just do this and that might fix the problem you're trying to work-around?
In any case, can you provide a bit more context on the failing platform(s)?
As I explained above, the functionality remains unchanged. Even if you build atf via binam dts files the final binman node has to be in the order of last since input files like bl31 and tee.bin have depended. Adding all the binman image creations and the final binman image creation in one file make it difficult to read and maintain and unnecessary ifdef.
Thanks, Jagan.