From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28775C02192 for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2025 15:35:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lelvem-ot01.ext.ti.com (lelvem-ot01.ext.ti.com [198.47.23.234]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.90404.1738596901991996701 for ; Mon, 03 Feb 2025 07:35:02 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=fail reason="dkim: body hash did not verify" header.i=@ti.com header.s=ti-com-17Q1 header.b=cJ+kx8yX; spf=pass (domain: ti.com, ip: 198.47.23.234, mailfrom: reatmon@ti.com) Received: from lelv0266.itg.ti.com ([10.180.67.225]) by lelvem-ot01.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 513FZ1E93041012 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2025 09:35:01 -0600 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1738596901; bh=ZpRqxtY+gQDPQT/KRIdSu4PJl6bbSBayfKl4jiS4/rc=; h=Date:Subject:To:CC:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=cJ+kx8yX2/TzMMHEZDuHcDYO1trGku9z5270zramuxOKIGZjnBmQaMI1rCAAJw0NW Z2AXnYxQjw5GwFDjSbLM64xOY4+aIyR41ycznzhpTgZYSGJ8lRQnnlebb10fi0fS+o O0Z4cKwLFmpErBBUZeA327/GyR1KNOYODQ71susA= Received: from DLEE104.ent.ti.com (dlee104.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.34]) by lelv0266.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 513FZ12c069697 for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2025 09:35:01 -0600 Received: from DLEE105.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.35) by DLEE104.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23; Mon, 3 Feb 2025 09:35:00 -0600 Received: from lelvsmtp5.itg.ti.com (10.180.75.250) by DLEE105.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 3 Feb 2025 09:35:01 -0600 Received: from [10.249.32.112] ([10.249.32.112]) by lelvsmtp5.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 513FZ0Sr129991; Mon, 3 Feb 2025 09:35:00 -0600 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2025 09:35:00 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [meta-ti][scarthgap][PATCH] conf: machine: am69: Update filenames for initial bootloader tiboot3 To: Aniket Limaye , CC: , , , References: <20250203132307.2862016-1-a-limaye@ti.com> <3e299711-bbf8-4176-a101-0baec7df9772@ti.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Ryan Eatmon In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed X-C2ProcessedOrg: 333ef613-75bf-4e12-a4b1-8e3623f5dcea Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by lelvem-ot01.ext.ti.com id 513FZ1E93041012 List-Id: X-Webhook-Received: from li982-79.members.linode.com [45.33.32.79] by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org with HTTPS for ; Mon, 03 Feb 2025 15:35:10 -0000 X-Groupsio-URL: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/message/18245 On 2/3/2025 9:25 AM, Aniket Limaye wrote: >=20 >=20 > On 03/02/25 20:16, Ryan Eatmon wrote: >> >> >> On 2/3/2025 7:18 AM, Aniket Limaye wrote: >>> Update the filenames for tiboot3.bin variants built by the u-boot rec= ipe >>> and also the files expected by the wic image. >>> >>> So far am69-sk and j784s4-evm have shared the same binman include fil= e >>> and hence the same filenames for u-boot images. However, with the >>> configs and the devicetree being different, the same built binary doe= s >>> not support both boards. Hence the filenames of images built for am69= -sk >>> should reflect support for the same. The corresponding >>> >>> This change is currently only applicable to ti-u-boot-2025.01, and he= nce >>> it is restricted to the override bsp-ti-6_12. >> >> Actually... I would prefer to align all of the defaults with the=20 >> current default BSP.=C2=A0 Which right now is 6.12. >> >> So can you flip this patch around?=C2=A0 Make the default be the new n= ame=20 >> and add multiple settings for the old name on the other BSPs?=C2=A0 I = think=20 >> it would be more confusing to try and unravel the twisty maze of=20 >> settings otherwise if we don't have a standard. >> >=20 > Yeah I can do that... I was wondering the same but thought I would keep= =20 > the patch smaller by adding an override for only the BSP that requires=20 > it, instead of override for every other BSP. But yeah since overrides=20 > will not be required for upstream eventually, makes sense to do it the=20 > other way around from the get go. Will send a v2 >=20 > Another question I had was about the SYSFW_* variables... These are ONL= Y=20 > being used by SPL_BINARY variable defined in k3r5.inc for the u-boot=20 > recipe. Should I rename those variables to UBOOT_*, since it is quite=20 > confusing currently. > Eg: SYSFW_SOC =3D am69 but will use tifs binary with j784s4 and produce= =20 > tiboot3-am69-*.bin >=20 > Infact why not define SPL_BINARY directly in -k3r5.conf instead=20 > of having these additional unnecessary variables to configure the=20 > SPL_BINARY from k3r5.inc Generally speaking, I'm not opposed to cleaning up variable names to be=20 more clear, but since this would be a change that would impact all=20 platforms, I would prefer this patch leave the SYSFW stuff and then=20 submit a second patch that cleans up all of the platforms at once. The only issue I can see with naming them UBOOT_* is that it might be=20 confusing that these variable are used in the uboot recipe itself.=20 Maybe TI_UBOOT_* would better to show that they are TI specific variables. > Maybe I'll address this in v2 as well... >=20 >> >>> Signed-off-by: Aniket Limaye >>> --- >>> This patch needs to be merged in sync with the corresponding patch fo= r >>> ti-u-boot-2025.01. >>> >>> The u-boot patch has also been posted to upstream u-boot and when mer= ged >>> there, the next/upstream BSP packages will also need this change. >>> https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20250106-b4-upstream-j742s2-v2-2-42d61= 29ce333@ti.com/ >>> --- >>> =C2=A0 meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/am69-sk-k3r5.conf | 2 ++ >>> =C2=A0 meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/am69.inc=C2=A0 | 7 ++++--- >>> =C2=A0 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/am69-sk-k3r5.conf=20 >>> b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/am69-sk-k3r5.conf >>> index 9d2b4cd6..376d8153 100644 >>> --- a/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/am69-sk-k3r5.conf >>> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/am69-sk-k3r5.conf >>> @@ -5,7 +5,9 @@ >>> =C2=A0 require conf/machine/include/k3r5.inc >>> =C2=A0 SYSFW_SOC =3D "j784s4" >>> +SYSFW_SOC:bsp-ti-6_12 =3D "am69" >>> =C2=A0 SYSFW_CONFIG =3D "evm" >>> +SYSFW_CONFIG:bsp-ti-6_12 =3D "sk" >>> =C2=A0 SYSFW_SUFFIX =3D "hs-fs" >>> =C2=A0 UBOOT_MACHINE =3D "am69_sk_r5_defconfig" >>> diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/am69.inc=20 >>> b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/am69.inc >>> index da8a5a8b..e82d58e2 100644 >>> --- a/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/am69.inc >>> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/am69.inc >>> @@ -9,10 +9,11 @@ require conf/machine/include/mesa-pvr.inc >>> =C2=A0 PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/gpudriver ?=3D "${BSP_ROGUE_DRIVER_= PROVIDER}" >>> =C2=A0 # Default tiboot3.bin on AM69 is for SR1.0 HS-FS >>> -IMAGE_BOOT_FILES +=3D "tiboot3-j784s4-hs-fs-evm.bin" >>> +# Add tiboot3.bin for all SOC types, to the wic image. >>> +BSP_BOOTLOADER_FILES =3D "tiboot3-j784s4-hs-fs-evm.bin=20 >>> tiboot3-j784s4-hs-evm.bin" >>> +BSP_BOOTLOADER_FILES:bsp-ti-6_12 =3D "tiboot3-am69-hs-fs-sk.bin=20 >>> tiboot3-am69-hs-sk.bin" >>> -# Since default tiboot3.bin on AM69 is for HS-FS, add a version for=20 >>> SR1.0 HS-SE >>> -IMAGE_BOOT_FILES +=3D "tiboot3-j784s4-hs-evm.bin" >>> +IMAGE_BOOT_FILES +=3D "${BSP_BOOTLOADER_FILES}" >>> =C2=A0 TFA_BOARD =3D "j784s4" >> --=20 Ryan Eatmon reatmon@ti.com ----------------------------------------- Texas Instruments, Inc. - LCPD - MGTS