Hi Rob,
On 1/14/25 9:36 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 12:08 PM Quentin Schulz quentin.schulz@cherry.de wrote:
Hi all,
In U-Boot, there are multiple stages which can be loaded from different media each. On Rockchip SoCs, it mostly goes this way, SoC BootROM loads from a medium (storage or over USB) and executes the TPL (or SPL if no TPL supported), the TPL goes back to BootROM and reads the SPL from the same medium and executes it. The SPL will favor the same medium for loading the U-Boot FIT image (containing TF-A BL31, OP-TEE OS BL32 and U-Boot proper image), but in case it fails, falls back to other possible media. In U-Boot we have the storage medium used for loading the U-Boot FIT image stored in the DTB under /chosen/u-boot,spl-boot-device property. But we do not have a property for the medium the BootROM loaded the TPL (or SPL) from. This could be useful information. For example, I have some CI where I want to check whether the BootROM loaded the TPL from the expected location (important when checking that they all work and don't depend on a bootloader flashed in a fallback medium for example). Another usecase could be to detect whenever one loads the TPL from USB (not a USB stick, some USB transfer; see rockusb for Rockchip for example) and decide to do something else in U-Boot or the OS depending on that (could be starting DFU for flashing the device, or fastboot for loading the rest of the system).
Barebox currently does that by setting /chosen/bootsource to the full path of the device the BootROM says it booted from, but that isn't part of the DT spec so before I add support in U-Boot for that, I'm asking whether that's fine or if we should correct course in Barebox and use another name and/or location.
I don't see anything in your answer that would be applicable to /chosen/bootsource, am I correct in assuming that this part can go ahead and be submitted to the Device Tree schema/spec?
I've also been made aware of other "sources" that are added to the /chosen node in Barebox, reset-source, reset-source-instance and reset-source-device. I am not entirely sure what those exactly are for BUT it seems that this is of interest to U-Boot as well since we do try to report a reset cause as read from the CPU for Rockchip SoCs, c.f. https://elixir.bootlin.com/u-boot/v2024.10/source/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/cpu.... I believe /chosen/reset-source would be the reason, e.g. "POR", "RST", "WDG", "WKE", "THERM", etc. /chosen/reset-source-device contains the node path to the device that triggered that, that could be useful in the event there are more than one thermal trip point (e.g. CPU or GPU), or more than one hardware watchdog (I for example have a system with potentially 4: SoC, PMIC, 2 separate in an external MCU). I guess /chosen/reset-source-instance is for HW blocks that expose the same reset but from two different sources which aren't modeled in Device Tree. Again, this would be useful for the bootloader or OS to decide to do something else based on the reset cause (e.g. have data on why some devices reboot in the field, e.g. because of thermals, power loss, brownout, etc..).
Is the handling of these properties something common/generic or going to be device (e.g. wdog, pmic) specific. For the former, then /chosen makes sense. For the latter, maybe everything being in the device nodes makes more sense. Then you wouldn't need a link to the device.
I would imagine reset-source (the reason) to be device-specific. I'm sure there'll be some HW in the future with some odd reason to do a full HW reset or somehow support 10 different watchdogs in the same IP and we may want to know which one triggered it, I assume for that we wouldn't want WDG1 to WDG10 as possible reset-source? Though it seems that's what reset-source-instance would be for. Do we want to limit what the values of /chosen/reset-source could be in the schema? e.g. WDG for watchdog reset, THERM for temperature threshold exceeded, etc..
The issue I see with not having /chosen/reset-source-device but have some other property in the device node are two folds:
- in order to know which device triggered the reset, one will need to parse the whole tree for a specific property, - I could imagine a scenario where a device not supported by the OS (or only auto-discoverable?) triggers a HW reset (e.g. from TF-A, OP-TEE, a sidecar microcontroller, etc...), I wouldn't be able to add the property to a node. I also concede that I don't know what kind of path would make sense in that property in that event, so maybe that's something we can just ignore for the moment, or is not realistic.
I'm reaching out to the devicetree-spec community before I add code in U-Boot to implement this so we don't add unnecessary backward compatibility code, were the properties or locations to be modified to match the spec.
Does anyone disagree with adding this to the spec? Does anyone have another suggestion for the naming or location of the properties?
I always feel better if we have multiple users for a new, common binding. A new binding extended by a 2nd user shortly after defining it makes me grumpy. Here's a thread that came up with the same type of issue:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250113112349.801875-1-prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj...
I see...
The bootloader should be able to do something based on the reset source and reset device. Some HW devices do have clear on read status registers, so expecting the bootloader to not touch status registers is unrealistic in my opinion.
Also, as a user/distro I would need to try to get from all possible devices if any has a reason for the last system reset, across different subsystems I assume, so different APIs and all. This seems like a lot of work and error-prone.
The issue could be that they need the driver to do something specific if the device handled by that driver is the reason for the last system reset. If that's the case, then we could parse /chosen/reset-source-device and see it it's the same path as the device's and do something based on that and the other /chosen/reset-* properties. However, if there's a read-on-clear status register and we don't pass enough information through those properties, the device driver will not be able to handle things the way they want to.
Cheers, Quentin