[U-Boot] [PATCH] TPL/SPL: add separate CONFIG_TPL_FRAMEWORK for TPL
SPL_FRAMEWORK is a set of framework feature, we may not need the fromework for both TPL and SPL at the same time, so add a separate one for TPL.
Signed-off-by: Kever Yang kever.yang@rock-chips.com ---
Makefile | 2 +- arch/arm/lib/Makefile | 4 ++-- arch/arm/lib/crt0.S | 6 +++++- common/spl/Kconfig | 9 +++++++++ common/spl/Makefile | 2 +- scripts/Makefile.spl | 4 ++++ 6 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index 4b3023b259..68b77d1e43 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -822,7 +822,7 @@ endif endif ALL-$(CONFIG_TPL) += tpl/u-boot-tpl.bin ALL-$(CONFIG_OF_SEPARATE) += u-boot.dtb -ifeq ($(CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK),y) +ifeq ($(CONFIG_TPL_FRAMEWORK),y) ALL-$(CONFIG_OF_SEPARATE) += u-boot-dtb.img endif ALL-$(CONFIG_OF_HOSTFILE) += u-boot.dtb diff --git a/arch/arm/lib/Makefile b/arch/arm/lib/Makefile index 655727f431..19a6775b0d 100644 --- a/arch/arm/lib/Makefile +++ b/arch/arm/lib/Makefile @@ -35,8 +35,8 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_CMD_BOOTM) += bootm.o obj-$(CONFIG_CMD_BOOTZ) += bootm.o zimage.o obj-$(CONFIG_SYS_L2_PL310) += cache-pl310.o else -obj-$(CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK) += spl.o -obj-$(CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK) += zimage.o +obj-$(CONFIG_$(SPL_TPL_)FRAMEWORK) += spl.o +obj-$(CONFIG_$(SPL_TPL_)FRAMEWORK) += zimage.o obj-$(CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT) += bootm-fdt.o endif obj-$(CONFIG_$(SPL_TPL_)USE_ARCH_MEMSET) += memset.o diff --git a/arch/arm/lib/crt0.S b/arch/arm/lib/crt0.S index 538d78c0b8..f1a8a7e7dc 100644 --- a/arch/arm/lib/crt0.S +++ b/arch/arm/lib/crt0.S @@ -120,7 +120,11 @@ here:
bl c_runtime_cpu_setup /* we still call old routine here */ #endif -#if !defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD) || defined(CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK) +#if !defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD) || \ + (defined(CONFIG_TPL_BUILD) && defined(CONFIG_TPL_FRAMEWORK)) || \ + (defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD) && !defined(CONFIG_TPL_BUILD) && \ + defined(CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK)) \ + # ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD /* Use a DRAM stack for the rest of SPL, if requested */ bl spl_relocate_stack_gd diff --git a/common/spl/Kconfig b/common/spl/Kconfig index db1915fe5c..1a2e10b892 100644 --- a/common/spl/Kconfig +++ b/common/spl/Kconfig @@ -813,6 +813,15 @@ config TPL help If you want to build TPL as well as the normal image and SPL, say Y.
+config TPL_FRAMEWORK + bool "Support TPL based upon the common TPL framework" + depends on TPL + default y + help + Enable the TPL framework under common/spl/. This framework + re-use the all the framework feature from SPL but enable separetely. + If unsure, say Y. + if TPL
config TPL_BOARD_INIT diff --git a/common/spl/Makefile b/common/spl/Makefile index a130a5be4b..dd2fc7a5d3 100644 --- a/common/spl/Makefile +++ b/common/spl/Makefile @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ #
ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD -obj-$(CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK) += spl.o +obj-$(CONFIG_$(SPL_TPL_)FRAMEWORK) += spl.o obj-$(CONFIG_$(SPL_TPL_)BOOTROM_SUPPORT) += spl_bootrom.o obj-$(CONFIG_$(SPL_TPL_)LOAD_FIT) += spl_fit.o obj-$(CONFIG_$(SPL_TPL_)NOR_SUPPORT) += spl_nor.o diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.spl b/scripts/Makefile.spl index 252f13826d..43949cdba1 100644 --- a/scripts/Makefile.spl +++ b/scripts/Makefile.spl @@ -64,7 +64,11 @@ HAVE_VENDOR_COMMON_LIB = $(if $(wildcard $(srctree)/board/$(VENDOR)/common/Makef libs-y += $(if $(BOARDDIR),board/$(BOARDDIR)/) libs-$(HAVE_VENDOR_COMMON_LIB) += board/$(VENDOR)/common/
+ifeq ($(CONFIG_TPL_BUILD),y) +libs-$(CONFIG_TPL_FRAMEWORK) += common/spl/ +else libs-$(CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK) += common/spl/ +endif libs-y += common/init/
# Special handling for a few options which support SPL/TPL
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 04:51:26PM +0800, Kever Yang wrote:
SPL_FRAMEWORK is a set of framework feature, we may not need the fromework for both TPL and SPL at the same time, so add a separate one for TPL.
Signed-off-by: Kever Yang kever.yang@rock-chips.com
Makefile | 2 +- arch/arm/lib/Makefile | 4 ++-- arch/arm/lib/crt0.S | 6 +++++- common/spl/Kconfig | 9 +++++++++ common/spl/Makefile | 2 +- scripts/Makefile.spl | 4 ++++ 6 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index 4b3023b259..68b77d1e43 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -822,7 +822,7 @@ endif endif ALL-$(CONFIG_TPL) += tpl/u-boot-tpl.bin ALL-$(CONFIG_OF_SEPARATE) += u-boot.dtb -ifeq ($(CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK),y) +ifeq ($(CONFIG_TPL_FRAMEWORK),y) ALL-$(CONFIG_OF_SEPARATE) += u-boot-dtb.img endif ALL-$(CONFIG_OF_HOSTFILE) += u-boot.dtb
We should be adding a new stanza here and not replacing the SPL one I would think.
[snip]
diff --git a/common/spl/Kconfig b/common/spl/Kconfig index db1915fe5c..1a2e10b892 100644 --- a/common/spl/Kconfig +++ b/common/spl/Kconfig @@ -813,6 +813,15 @@ config TPL help If you want to build TPL as well as the normal image and SPL, say Y.
+config TPL_FRAMEWORK
- bool "Support TPL based upon the common TPL framework"
- depends on TPL
- default y
- help
Enable the TPL framework under common/spl/. This frameworkre-use the all the framework feature from SPL but enable separetely.If unsure, say Y.
This shouldn't be default y, and the help shouldn't suggest that either I think. My concern with this series is TPL wasn't intended to get too featureful. Our initial constraints are enough that we need something to init DDR and load SPL into that as we can't do enough with our limited resources to load full U-Boot. In fact, looking at the follow up rockchip specific patch that's more in line what my expectations. So I think you should be able to get TPL to do what you want without introducing TPL_FRAMEWORK. Thanks!
Hi Tom,
On 08/28/2018 08:49 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 04:51:26PM +0800, Kever Yang wrote:
SPL_FRAMEWORK is a set of framework feature, we may not need the fromework for both TPL and SPL at the same time, so add a separate one for TPL.
Signed-off-by: Kever Yang kever.yang@rock-chips.com
Makefile | 2 +- arch/arm/lib/Makefile | 4 ++-- arch/arm/lib/crt0.S | 6 +++++- common/spl/Kconfig | 9 +++++++++ common/spl/Makefile | 2 +- scripts/Makefile.spl | 4 ++++ 6 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index 4b3023b259..68b77d1e43 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -822,7 +822,7 @@ endif endif ALL-$(CONFIG_TPL) += tpl/u-boot-tpl.bin ALL-$(CONFIG_OF_SEPARATE) += u-boot.dtb -ifeq ($(CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK),y) +ifeq ($(CONFIG_TPL_FRAMEWORK),y) ALL-$(CONFIG_OF_SEPARATE) += u-boot-dtb.img endif ALL-$(CONFIG_OF_HOSTFILE) += u-boot.dtb
We should be adding a new stanza here and not replacing the SPL one I would think.
This may not need, I though this is for TPL because it's just after target for CONFIG_TPL. Will drop this part next version.
[snip]
diff --git a/common/spl/Kconfig b/common/spl/Kconfig index db1915fe5c..1a2e10b892 100644 --- a/common/spl/Kconfig +++ b/common/spl/Kconfig @@ -813,6 +813,15 @@ config TPL help If you want to build TPL as well as the normal image and SPL, say Y.
+config TPL_FRAMEWORK
- bool "Support TPL based upon the common TPL framework"
- depends on TPL
- default y
- help
Enable the TPL framework under common/spl/. This frameworkre-use the all the framework feature from SPL but enable separetely.If unsure, say Y.This shouldn't be default y, and the help shouldn't suggest that either I think. My concern with this series is TPL wasn't intended to get too featureful. Our initial constraints are enough that we need something to init DDR and load SPL into that as we can't do enough with our limited resources to load full U-Boot. In fact, looking at the follow up rockchip specific patch that's more in line what my expectations. So I think you should be able to get TPL to do what you want without introducing TPL_FRAMEWORK. Thanks!
I have to introducing TPL_FRAMEWORK because the SPL_FRAMEWORK is shared by TPL and SPL, if I have enable TPL and SPL, then: - I would like to use TPL without framework(which refers to DM, common lib and FDT); - I would like to use SPL with SPL_FRAMEWORK If there is no TPL_FRAMEWORK, then I'm not sure if I can use the TINY_FRAMEWORK to overwrite everything.
I introduce TINY_FRAMEWORK is to remove other program like vector table, runtime C init, which is not include in SPL_FRAMEWORK now.
Thanks, - Kever
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 09:11:35PM +0800, Kever Yang wrote:
Hi Tom,
On 08/28/2018 08:49 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 04:51:26PM +0800, Kever Yang wrote:
SPL_FRAMEWORK is a set of framework feature, we may not need the fromework for both TPL and SPL at the same time, so add a separate one for TPL.
Signed-off-by: Kever Yang kever.yang@rock-chips.com
Makefile | 2 +- arch/arm/lib/Makefile | 4 ++-- arch/arm/lib/crt0.S | 6 +++++- common/spl/Kconfig | 9 +++++++++ common/spl/Makefile | 2 +- scripts/Makefile.spl | 4 ++++ 6 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index 4b3023b259..68b77d1e43 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -822,7 +822,7 @@ endif endif ALL-$(CONFIG_TPL) += tpl/u-boot-tpl.bin ALL-$(CONFIG_OF_SEPARATE) += u-boot.dtb -ifeq ($(CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK),y) +ifeq ($(CONFIG_TPL_FRAMEWORK),y) ALL-$(CONFIG_OF_SEPARATE) += u-boot-dtb.img endif ALL-$(CONFIG_OF_HOSTFILE) += u-boot.dtb
We should be adding a new stanza here and not replacing the SPL one I would think.
This may not need, I though this is for TPL because it's just after target for CONFIG_TPL. Will drop this part next version.
[snip]
diff --git a/common/spl/Kconfig b/common/spl/Kconfig index db1915fe5c..1a2e10b892 100644 --- a/common/spl/Kconfig +++ b/common/spl/Kconfig @@ -813,6 +813,15 @@ config TPL help If you want to build TPL as well as the normal image and SPL, say Y.
+config TPL_FRAMEWORK
- bool "Support TPL based upon the common TPL framework"
- depends on TPL
- default y
- help
Enable the TPL framework under common/spl/. This frameworkre-use the all the framework feature from SPL but enable separetely.If unsure, say Y.This shouldn't be default y, and the help shouldn't suggest that either I think. My concern with this series is TPL wasn't intended to get too featureful. Our initial constraints are enough that we need something to init DDR and load SPL into that as we can't do enough with our limited resources to load full U-Boot. In fact, looking at the follow up rockchip specific patch that's more in line what my expectations. So I think you should be able to get TPL to do what you want without introducing TPL_FRAMEWORK. Thanks!
I have to introducing TPL_FRAMEWORK because the SPL_FRAMEWORK is shared by TPL and SPL, if I have enable TPL and SPL, then:
- I would like to use TPL without framework(which refers to DM, common
lib and FDT);
- I would like to use SPL with SPL_FRAMEWORK
If there is no TPL_FRAMEWORK, then I'm not sure if I can use the TINY_FRAMEWORK to overwrite everything.
I introduce TINY_FRAMEWORK is to remove other program like vector table, runtime C init, which is not include in SPL_FRAMEWORK now.
First, please make sure that your next series here has been through travis-ci or you've built some of the PowerPC targets (say ./tools/buildman/buildman.py p1_p2) as I'm pretty sure TPL_FRAMEWORK being on by default breaks them.
Next, I'm still not quite following, sorry. The way TPL is used normally today (again, see PowerPC for the non-rockchip examples) does not rely on the spl framework, and that's intentional as they have extremely limited resources. I still think you should be able to rework things such that you don't need TPL_FRAMEWORK being set to them overwrite most of it. Thanks!
participants (2)
-
Kever Yang -
Tom Rini