Re: [PATCH v3 11/19] am64x: dts: binman: Package tiboot3.bin, tispl.bin u-boot.img

[Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>]

On 4/25/23 2:31 AM, Neha Malcom Francis wrote:
> Hi Simon
> 
> On 25/04/23 01:12, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi Neha,
>>
>> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 at 06:32, Neha Malcom Francis <n-francis@ti.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Support added for HS and GP boot binaries for AM64x.
>>>
>>> tiboot3.bin, tispl.bin and u-boot.img: For HS-SE devices
>>> tiboot3.bin_fs, tispl.bin and u-boot.img: For HS-FS devices
>>> tiboot3.bin_unsigned, tispl.bin_unsigned, u-boot.img_unsigned: For GP
>>> devices
>>>
>>> Note that the bootflow followed by AM64x requires:
>>>
>>> tiboot3.bin:
>>>          * R5 SPL
>>>          * R5 SPL dtbs
>>>          * sysfw
>>>          * board-cfg
>>>          * pm-cfg
>>>          * sec-cfg
>>>          * rm-cfg
>>>
>>> tispl.bin:
>>>          * ATF
>>>          * OPTEE
>>>          * A53 SPL
>>>          * A53 SPL dtbs
>>>
>>> u-boot.img:
>>>          * A53 U-Boot
>>>          * A53 U-Boot dtbs
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Neha Malcom Francis <n-francis@ti.com>
>>> ---
>>>   arch/arm/dts/k3-am642-evm-u-boot.dtsi |   2 +
>>>   arch/arm/dts/k3-am642-r5-evm.dts      |   1 +
>>>   arch/arm/dts/k3-am64x-binman.dtsi     | 569 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>   board/ti/am64x/Kconfig                |   2 +
>>>   4 files changed, 574 insertions(+)
>>>   create mode 100644 arch/arm/dts/k3-am64x-binman.dtsi
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
>>
>> I notice that some of the entries are optional. Do you actual make use
>> of this (i.e. that when they are missing binman removes the entries)?
>>
> 
> So right now the build generates binaries for all three types: HS-FS, HS-SE and GP devices. It's not necessary for the user to provide component binaries for all three of them, say they only have GP SYSFW binaries available with them.

Would this ever need to happen? We provide all three firmware types for all our
SoCs out in public[0], why would anyone only have one type of firmware available?

Andrew

[0] https://git.ti.com/cgit/processor-firmware/ti-linux-firmware/tree/ti-sysfw?h=ti-linux-firmware

> So that was the reasoning behind putting those binaries as optional, we should not have a failed build in those cases. However binaries like DM and board-config binaries that are common between all three needs to be there so it's not optional.
> 
>> Regards,
>> Simon
>