Buildroot Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Seiderer <ps.report@gmx.net>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [RFC/next v2 1/2] package/rpi-firmware: rework boot/config file handling
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2021 23:14:54 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210308231454.519fa1dc@gmx.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210308215541.GB2737665@scaer>

Hello Yann,

On Mon, 8 Mar 2021 22:55:41 +0100, "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote:

> Peter, All,
>
> On 2021-02-16 21:11 +0100, Peter Seiderer spake thusly:
> > Try to be less smart (focused on the one target/one use-case),
> > instead reduce the rpi-firmware package to a selectable list
> > of (verbatim) installed firmware files.
> >
> > - change rpi-firmware config handling from rpi-variant/rpi-flavour
> >   choices to bootcode.bin, pi-default/-extended/-cut-down and
> >   pi4-/default/-extended/-cut-down selection
> >
> > - add BR2_PACKAGE_RPI_FIRMWARE_CONFIG_FILE option to select installable
> >   config.txt file
> >
> > - remove config.txt modify code/handling from raspberry post-image.sh
> >   script
> >
> > - add different customized config.txt files to the raspberry board
> >   section
> >
> > - change raspberry defconfigs to select appropiate rpi-firmware
> >   and config.txt files
> >
> > - change genimage-raspberrypi4.cfg/genimage-raspberrypi4-64.cfg to
> >   use start4.elf and fixup4.dat
> >
> > With this changes a better support for custom use-cases should
> > be possible, specially multi-target SD cards as suggested by
> > Stefan Agner ([1]).
> >
> > [1] http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2021-February/303318.html
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Seiderer <ps.report@gmx.net>
>
> So I have started looking at this patch, and although I think it is
> going in the right direction, there are two things I am not very happy
> with...
>
> I'm not saying they would be definite blockers, just that I'd like we
> think a bit more about it.
>
> So, the first thing that bugs me, are all the varions config.txt files
> that are mostly identical, except of a few tweaks:
>
>   - dtoverlay=miniuart-bt or not
>   - arm_64bit=1 or not
>
> And the arm_64bit=1 can be automatically added when Buildroot is
> configured for BR2_aarch64=y anyway.
>
> And of course, a single outlier, the qt5we example, that has
> gpu_mem_1024=200...
>
> Still, that makes me nervous to mostly duplicate all those config.txt...
>
> The second thing leaves me thinking is the new config option that
> points to the config.txt to use. My first reaction was 'hell-no, this
> belongs to the post-image script and we should have it passed with
> BR2_ROOTFS_POST_SCRIPT_ARGS="board/rpiXXX/config_XXX.txt".'
>
> But them this means that the rpi post-image script diverges from the
> others; the few others I've had a look at are just callinggenimage
> without amy preparation whatsoever. The rpi one is already diverging, as
> it creates a temporary empty rootpath (commit ee47fea5781) and currently
> has a few options that none of the others have.
>
> Getting rid of the existing options --miniuart, --aarch64, et al. is a
> nice thing, because it helps get it more inline with the others...
>
> But still, I am not too fond of this new BR2_PACKAGE_RPI_FIRMWARE_CONFIG_FILE
> option...
>
> And really, both issues are really just me wondering if we can't do
> better...
>
> So, let's keep the qt5 example aside, and see what we can do. What if
> we'd go with the following:
>
>   - keep a single, generic config.txt in rpi-firmware, and install that,
>
>   - if BR2_aarch64=y, add arm_64bit=1
>
>   - add an option to rpi-firmware:
>
>     config BR2_PKG_RPI_FW_DTOVERLAY_LIST
>         string "DT overlays to load"
>         depends on BR2_PACKAGE_RPI_FIRMWARE_INSTALL_DTB_OVERLAYS
>         help
>           Space-separated list of DT overlays to be loaded from config.txt.
>
>           For example, miniuart-bt on rpi0w to restore the serial console.
>
>     and if this option is not empty, construct the list of dtoverlay and
>     add it to config.txt.
>
>   - eventually, adapt the defconfigs with that list of dtoverlays

...but back to the direction of trying to being smart..., which can work for
90% of the buildroot defconfig cases, but will not work for the rest of the
buildroot ones (one at the moment) and not for customized ones (none dtoverlay
extensions, multi-bootable SD-Cards, ...)...

Regards,
Peter

>
> Thoughts?
>
> Regards,
> Yann E. MORIN.
>

  reply	other threads:[~2021-03-08 22:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-02-16 20:11 [Buildroot] [RFC/next v2 1/2] package/rpi-firmware: rework boot/config file handling Peter Seiderer
2021-02-16 20:11 ` [Buildroot] [RFC/next v2 2/2] package/rpi-firmware: add option for the debug set of start/fixup boot files Peter Seiderer
2021-02-17  9:21 ` [Buildroot] [RFC/next v2 1/2] package/rpi-firmware: rework boot/config file handling Stefan Agner
2021-03-08 21:55 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-03-08 22:14   ` Peter Seiderer [this message]
2021-03-08 22:27     ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-03-09 20:32       ` Peter Seiderer
2021-03-09 21:29         ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-03-09 21:35           ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-03-18 22:25           ` Peter Seiderer
2021-03-20 22:09             ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-03-21 12:00               ` Peter Seiderer
2021-03-08 22:04 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-03-09 20:25   ` Peter Seiderer
2021-03-09 20:33     ` Yann E. MORIN

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20210308231454.519fa1dc@gmx.net \
    --to=ps.report@gmx.net \
    --cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox