public inbox for devicetree@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org>
To: FUKAUMI Naoki <naoki@radxa.com>
Cc: "Heiko Stübner" <heiko@sntech.de>,
	robh@kernel.org, krzk+dt@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add support for Radxa ROCK Pi E v3.0
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 13:25:04 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f5528290efb529ebcb599a2f1c309e63@manjaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d40e95d42074b9a2b8d353881d1be248@manjaro.org>

Hello Naoki,

On 2024-08-18 00:30, Dragan Simic wrote:
> On 2024-08-17 22:28, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
>> On 8/18/24 05:12, Dragan Simic wrote:
>>> On 2024-08-17 22:04, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
>>>> On 8/18/24 04:51, Dragan Simic wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-08-17 21:28, Dragan Simic wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-08-17 00:20, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/17/24 07:11, Heiko Stübner wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am Freitag, 16. August 2024, 23:34:29 CEST schrieb FUKAUMI 
>>>>>>>> Naoki:
>>>>>>>>> Radxa ROCK Pi E v3.0 is a compact networking SBC[1] using the 
>>>>>>>>> Rockchip
>>>>>>>>> RK3328 chip that ships in a number of RAM/eMMC/WiFi/BT 
>>>>>>>>> configurations:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> - Rockchip RK3328 SoC
>>>>>>>>> - Quad A53 CPU
>>>>>>>>> - 512MB/1GB/2GB DDR4 RAM
>>>>>>> (snip)
>>>>>>>> can you please describe what is different in that v3 board?
>>>>>>>> Describing what is different to require a separate board 
>>>>>>>> should've been
>>>>>>>> part of the commit message.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Because from those changes, the bottom line currently seems to 
>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>> the same board with swapped mmc aliases?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> it's new board which uses DDR4 RAM (instead of DDR3 RAM on Pi E).
>>>>>>> different bootloader (U-Boot) is required.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> adding v3 dts seems not to be so important for Linux, but it's 
>>>>>>> very
>>>>>>> important for U-Boot and OpenWrt(it includes bootloader for
>>>>>>> distributed binary).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Aren't there different methods that allow such board variants to 
>>>>>> be
>>>>>> supported in U-Boot, with no need for a separate DT in the kernel?
>>>>>> IIRC, there are already more than a few examples of such board 
>>>>>> variants,
>>>>>> which require different DRAM initialization, which is covered in 
>>>>>> U-Boot
>>>>>> by providing different builds that use the same DT.
>>>>> 
>>>>> As an example, please have a look at the following files in U-Boot:
>>>>> 
>>>>> - arch/arm/dts/rk3399-nanopi-m4-u-boot.dtsi
>>>>> - arch/arm/dts/rk3399-nanopi-m4-2gb-u-boot.dtsi
>>>>> - configs/nanopi-m4-rk3399_defconfig
>>>>> - configs/nanopi-m4-2gb-rk3399_defconfig
>>>>> 
>>>>> Basically, there's no need for separate DTs in the kernel, just to 
>>>>> support
>>>>> board variants with different DRAM types in U-Boot.
>>>> 
>>>> OpenWrt firmware upgrading tool (sysupgrade) refers "compatible"
>>>> string to validate new firmware file is surely "for this board".
>>>> 
>>>> currently both Pi E dts have "radxa,rockpi-e", it makes flashing 
>>>> wrong
>>>> firmware (include bootloaer, U-Boot) possible.
>>> 
>>> Could you, please, explain what's the actual issue with OpenWrt?  I 
>>> did
>>> read some GitHub issue that described it, IIRC, but I was unable to 
>>> fully
>>> understand what's the underlying issue.
>> 
>> $ wget
>> https://downloads.openwrt.org/snapshots/targets/rockchip/armv8/openwrt-rockchip-armv8-radxa_rock-pi-e-ext4-sysupgrade.img.gz
>> $ strings
>> openwrt-rockchip-armv8-radxa_rock-pi-e-ext4-sysupgrade.img.gz | grep
>> metadata
>> {  "metadata_version": "1.1", "compat_version": "1.0",
>> "supported_devices":["radxa,rock-pi-e"], "version": { "dist":
>> "OpenWrt", "version": "SNAPSHOT", "revision": "r27160-b72c4b5386",
>> "target": "rockchip/armv8", "board": "radxa_rock-pi-e" } }
>> 
>> $ wget
>> https://downloads.openwrt.org/snapshots/targets/rockchip/armv8/openwrt-rockchip-armv8-radxa_rock-pi-e-v3-ext4-sysupgrade.img.gz
>> $ strings
>> openwrt-rockchip-armv8-radxa_rock-pi-e-v3-ext4-sysupgrade.img.gz |
>> grep metadata
>> {  "metadata_version": "1.1", "compat_version": "1.0",
>> "supported_devices":["radxa,rock-pi-e-v3"], "version": { "dist":
>> "OpenWrt", "version": "SNAPSHOT", "revision": "r27160-b72c4b5386",
>> "target": "rockchip/armv8", "board": "radxa_rock-pi-e-v3" } }
>> 
>> since they are incompatible firmware, it needs to have different
>> "supported_devices" string. if both are "radxa,rockpi-e", firmware
>> validation will not work correctly.
>> 
>> (currently both values are wrong, it needs to be fixed, but it's 
>> another story)
>> 
>>>> Radxa ROCK Pi E v1.x(DDR3) and ROCK Pi E v3(DDR4) are different
>>>> incompatible boards, it must have different "compatible" string.
>>> 
>>> Well, the above-mentioned Nano Pi M4 boards share the same DT and the 
>>> same
>>> "compatible" value, because for all consumers of the DT, except for 
>>> U-Boot
>>> that can already handle the differences, they are the same boards.
>> 
>> (un)fortunately Nano Pi M4 boards seems not to be supported by OpenWrt
>> 
>>  https://downloads.openwrt.org/snapshots/targets/rockchip/armv8/
> 
> Thanks for the explanations.  As discussed further in #linux-rockchip
> on Libera.Chat, we do need a general solution for this issue, which 
> would
> get us covered for all the board variants that use different DRAM 
> chips,
> which are currently known to U-Boot only.
> 
> I'll keep thinking about this in the next couple of days, and I'll come
> back with an update.

As a separate thought, is there some way to detect the actual ROCK Pi E
board variant at runtime, using some GPIO line, ADC readout, or 
something
similar?  That would help with making it possible to have a single 
U-Boot
build for both board variants.

  reply	other threads:[~2024-08-26 11:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-08-16 21:34 [PATCH v5 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add support for Radxa ROCK Pi E v3.0 FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-08-16 21:34 ` [PATCH v5 2/2] arm64: dts: " FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-08-16 22:11   ` Heiko Stübner
2024-08-16 22:20     ` FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-08-17 19:28       ` Dragan Simic
2024-08-17 19:51         ` Dragan Simic
2024-08-17 20:04           ` FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-08-17 20:11             ` FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-08-17 20:12             ` Dragan Simic
2024-08-17 20:28               ` FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-08-17 21:32                 ` FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-08-17 22:30                 ` Dragan Simic
2024-08-26 11:25                   ` Dragan Simic [this message]
2024-08-26 23:20                     ` FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-08-27  1:34                       ` FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-08-17  6:59 ` [PATCH v5 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: " Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-08-19 17:02 ` Rob Herring (Arm)

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=f5528290efb529ebcb599a2f1c309e63@manjaro.org \
    --to=dsimic@manjaro.org \
    --cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=heiko@sntech.de \
    --cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=naoki@radxa.com \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    /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