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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55A67C433DB for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 14:20:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99A78239D1 for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 14:20:04 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 99A78239D1 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:58868 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l2aod-0001Gj-8t for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 09:20:03 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34084) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l2anY-0000dJ-Kp; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 09:18:56 -0500 Received: from mail-lf1-x130.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::130]:43556) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l2anS-0008Kw-Mw; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 09:18:56 -0500 Received: by mail-lf1-x130.google.com with SMTP id q8so2699696lfm.10; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 06:18:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=9Ba2VZkAK1Ral+x3NWU0sxI9dcGvQgZH744lMcTH4XU=; b=Zew26YpiYl5Gx1Msnb9a0WurNX29rnbZBKghAB9nRSsndAUGWdAwL2DoBMSKM1rI4H WaH9RfQcHjLkTFcU6komvOARYb0eMx/g5IQUwEj46ZUZiHs+LVneB8xeqNqI4oowJKaE yHGmWw/f62cX0sppvkPUFY1tKc1KucqHsMgQaD3l/Ji/0JRPJEjYD6WOdRN53kapFxmT coapsRKAohkK5sL/Y0M6IpiNYAjRitvQiMsfVtMUcQ6KtmDm4T1QX8KY7gVjE7WUwi6J gBBlASOceS3esrYTsEObqQxzned8btRX64clcabVfG+kyghx74L38k+tVLaSkpFm5bgW opjw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=9Ba2VZkAK1Ral+x3NWU0sxI9dcGvQgZH744lMcTH4XU=; b=sTqfffWc1UREfVN4EpROcYUE1U1IATKOS4UYRqmimZcO44ZIh63tEqDNySvYP4VK+8 +ao28t93E/tkWB4ZN08ZqJVC7mDMa1GwqJCOyPYvt30+X96/oJ3VLwNOHP+stjgOVcFn 0kW5U/G8hupsM286ANZHH7T/PplEAiMXEHujEWihnsD+m5OMZdqdROtevzlEKhLFVUpA xx/6fUfSDPi07hsruJP3FVeG7o9uOTAHvKagwef/eHYP2CiRQ4q3q2AYb1In/5kAoqly x7oCqxSbKL7WoE4RcaCVo5dSLN4bOrzLtXXE9IlMf/jPkNNyrzK/UfnxjG5CwfHhCxrV l6Xg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5328p+kKjNtg7dMX7mPn27OzsONGHFtNT2FJRjWVLp+EDSDj8TuA 4fNGRU7adcF6KSlsDvOrlws= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzwVh2HT6b3faYAw7Zx4oWWk7DkpGOumN62hRrPtX/tzUrasi1p0U3kZKmRzR/o3TOPxx4yyg== X-Received: by 2002:a19:2c4:: with SMTP id 187mr6796882lfc.391.1611238727875; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 06:18:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from fralle-msi (31-208-27-151.cust.bredband2.com. [31.208.27.151]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n25sm539900lfh.177.2021.01.21.06.18.46 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 21 Jan 2021 06:18:47 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:18:45 +0100 From: Francisco Iglesias To: Bin Meng Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] hw/block: m25p80: Fix the mess of dummy bytes needed for fast read commands Message-ID: <20210121141844.GC10391@fralle-msi> References: <20210114181300.GA29923@fralle-msi> <20210115122627.GB29923@fralle-msi> <20210118100557.GA11373@fralle-msi> <20210119130113.GA28306@fralle-msi> <20210121085006.GA10391@fralle-msi> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::130; envelope-from=frasse.iglesias@gmail.com; helo=mail-lf1-x130.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -1020 X-Spam_score: -102.1 X-Spam_bar: --------------------------------------------------- X-Spam_report: (-102.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WELCOMELIST=-0.01, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Kevin Wolf , Peter Maydell , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org Developers" , Qemu-block , Andrew Jeffery , Bin Meng , Philippe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mathieu-Daud=E9?= , Havard Skinnemoen , Tyrone Ting , qemu-arm , Alistair Francis , =?iso-8859-1?Q?C=E9dric?= Le Goater , Joe Komlodi , Max Reitz , Joel Stanley Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" Hi Bin, On [2021 Jan 21] Thu 16:59:51, Bin Meng wrote: > Hi Francisco, > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 4:50 PM Francisco Iglesias > wrote: > > > > Dear Bin, > > > > On [2021 Jan 20] Wed 22:20:25, Bin Meng wrote: > > > Hi Francisco, > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 9:01 PM Francisco Iglesias > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Bin, > > > > > > > > On [2021 Jan 18] Mon 20:32:19, Bin Meng wrote: > > > > > Hi Francisco, > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 6:06 PM Francisco Iglesias > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Bin, > > > > > > > > > > > > On [2021 Jan 15] Fri 22:38:18, Bin Meng wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Francisco, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 8:26 PM Francisco Iglesias > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Bin, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On [2021 Jan 15] Fri 10:07:52, Bin Meng wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Francisco, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 2:13 AM Francisco Iglesias > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Bin, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On [2021 Jan 14] Thu 23:08:53, Bin Meng wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > From: Bin Meng > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The m25p80 model uses s->needed_bytes to indicate how many follow-up > > > > > > > > > > > bytes are expected to be received after it receives a command. For > > > > > > > > > > > example, depending on the address mode, either 3-byte address or > > > > > > > > > > > 4-byte address is needed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For fast read family commands, some dummy cycles are required after > > > > > > > > > > > sending the address bytes, and the dummy cycles need to be counted > > > > > > > > > > > in s->needed_bytes. This is where the mess began. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As the variable name (needed_bytes) indicates, the unit is in byte. > > > > > > > > > > > It is not in bit, or cycle. However for some reason the model has > > > > > > > > > > > been using the number of dummy cycles for s->needed_bytes. The right > > > > > > > > > > > approach is to convert the number of dummy cycles to bytes based on > > > > > > > > > > > the SPI protocol, for example, 6 dummy cycles for the Fast Read Quad > > > > > > > > > > > I/O (EBh) should be converted to 3 bytes per the formula (6 * 4 / 8). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > While not being the original implementor I must assume that above solution was > > > > > > > > > > considered but not chosen by the developers due to it is inaccuracy (it > > > > > > > > > > wouldn't be possible to model exacly 6 dummy cycles, only a multiple of 8, > > > > > > > > > > meaning that if the controller is wrongly programmed to generate 7 the error > > > > > > > > > > wouldn't be caught and the controller will still be considered "correct"). Now > > > > > > > > > > that we have this detail in the implementation I'm in favor of keeping it, this > > > > > > > > > > also because the detail is already in use for catching exactly above error. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I found no clue from the commit message that my proposed solution here > > > > > > > > > was ever considered, otherwise all SPI controller models supporting > > > > > > > > > software generation should have been found out seriously broken long > > > > > > > > > time ago! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The controllers you are referring to might lack support for commands requiring > > > > > > > > dummy clock cycles but I really hope they work with the other commands? If so I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not sure why you view dummy clock cycles as something special > > > > > > > that needs some special support from the SPI controller. For the case > > > > > > > 1 controller, it's nothing special from the controller perspective, > > > > > > > just like sending out a command, or address bytes, or data. The > > > > > > > controller just shifts data bit by bit from its tx fifo and that's it. > > > > > > > In the Xilinx GQSPI controller case, the dummy cycles can either be > > > > > > > sent via a regular data (the case 1 controller) in the tx fifo, or > > > > > > > automatically generated (case 2 controller) by the hardware. > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, I'll try to explain my view point a little differently. For that we also > > > > > > need to keep in mind that QEMU models HW, and any binary that runs on a HW > > > > > > board supported in QEMU should ideally run on that board inside QEMU aswell > > > > > > (this can be a bare metal application equaly well as a modified u-boot/Linux > > > > > > using SPI commands with a non multiple of 8 number of dummy clock cycles). > > > > > > > > > > > > Once functionality has been introduced into QEMU it is not easy to know which > > > > > > intentional or untentional features provided by the functionality are being > > > > > > used by users. One of the (perhaps not well known) features I'm aware of that > > > > > > is in use and is provided by the accurate dummy clock cycle modeling inside > > > > > > m25p80 is the be ability to test drivers accurately regarding the dummy clock > > > > > > cycles (even when using commands with a non-multiple of 8 number of dummy clock > > > > > > cycles), but there might be others aswell. So by removing this functionality > > > > > > above use case will brake, this since those test will not be reliable. > > > > > > Furthermore, since users tend to be creative it is not possible to know if > > > > > > there are other use cases that will be affected. This means that in case [1] > > > > > > needs to be followed the safe path is to add functionality instead of removing. > > > > > > Luckily it also easier in this case, see below. > > > > > > > > > > I understand there might be users other than U-Boot/Linux that use an > > > > > odd number of dummy bits (not multiple of 8). If your concern was > > > > > about model behavior changes, sure I can update > > > > > qemu/docs/system/deprecated.rst to mention that some flashes in the > > > > > m25p80 model now implement dummy cycles as bytes. > > > > > > > > Yes, something like that. My concern is that since this functionality has been > > > > in tree for while, users have found known or unknown features that got > > > > introduced by it. By removing the functionality (and the known/uknown features) > > > > we are riscing to brake our user's use cases (currently I'm aware of one > > > > feature/use case but it is not unlikely that there are more). [1] states that > > > > "In general features are intended to be supported indefinitely once introduced > > > > into QEMU", to me that makes very much sense because the opposite would mean > > > > that we were not reliable. So in case [1] needs to be honored it looks to be > > > > safer to add functionality instead of removing (and riscing the removal of use > > > > cases/features). Luckily I still believe in this case that it will be easier to > > > > go forward (even if I also agree on what you are saying below about what I > > > > proposed). > > > > > > > > > > Even if the implementation is buggy and we need to keep the buggy > > > implementation forever? I think that's why > > > qemu/docs/system/deprecated.rst was created for deprecating such > > > feature. > > > > With the RFC I posted all commands in m25p80 are working for both the case 1 > > controller (using a txfifo) and the case 2 controller (no txfifo, as GQSPI). > > Because of this, I, with all respect, will have to disagree that this is buggy. > > Well, the existing m25p80 implementation that uses dummy cycle > accuracy for those flashes prevents all SPI controllers that use tx > fifo to work with those flashes. Hence it is buggy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > don't think it is fair to call them 'seriously broken' (and else we should > > > > > > > > probably let the maintainers know about it). Most likely the lack of support > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I called it "seriously broken" because current implementation only > > > > > > > considered one type of SPI controllers while completely ignoring the > > > > > > > other type. > > > > > > > > > > > > If we change view and see this from the perspective of m25p80, it models the > > > > > > commands a certain way and provides an API that the SPI controllers need to > > > > > > implement for interacting with it. It is true that there are SPI controllers > > > > > > referred to above that do not support the portion of that API that corresponds > > > > > > to commands with dummy clock cycles, but I don't think it is true that this is > > > > > > broken since there is also one SPI controller that has a working implementation > > > > > > of m25p80's full API also when transfering through a tx fifo (use case 1). But > > > > > > as mentioned above, by doing a minor extension and improvement to m25p80's API > > > > > > and allow for toggling the accuracy from dummy clock cycles to dummy bytes [1] > > > > > > will still be honored as in the same time making it possible to have full > > > > > > support for the API in the SPI controllers that currently do not (please reread > > > > > > the proposal in my previous reply that attempts to do this). I myself see this > > > > > > as win/win situation, also because no controller should need modifications. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am afraid your proposal does not work. Your proposed new device > > > > > property 'model_dummy_bytes' to select to convert the accurate dummy > > > > > clock cycle count to dummy bytes inside m25p80, is hard to justify as > > > > > a property to the flash itself, as the behavior is tightly coupled to > > > > > how the SPI controller works. > > > > > > > > I agree on above. I decided though that instead of posting sample code in here > > > > I'll post an RFC with hopefully an improved proposal. I'll cc you. About below, > > > > Xilinx ZynqMP GQSPI should not need any modication in a first step. > > > > > > > > > > Wait, (see below) > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please take a look at the Xilinx GQSPI controller, which supports both > > > > > use cases, that the dummy cycles can be transferred via tx fifo, or > > > > > generated by the controller automatically. Please read the example > > > > > given in: > > > > > > > > > > table 24‐22, an example of Generic FIFO Contents for Quad I/O Read > > > > > Command (EBh) > > > > > > > > > > in https://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/user_guides/ug1085-zynq-ultrascale-trm.pdf > > > > > > > > > > If you choose to set the m25p80 device property 'model_dummy_bytes' to > > > > > true when working with the Xilinx GQSPI controller, you are bound to > > > > > only allow guest software to use tx fifo to transfer the dummy cycles, > > > > > and this is wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > You missed this part. I looked at your RFC, and as I mentioned above > > > your proposal cannot support the complicated controller like Xilinx > > > GQSPI. Please read the example of table 24-22. With your RFC, you > > > mandate guest software's GQSPI driver to only use hardware dummy cycle > > > generation, which is wrong. > > > > > > > First, thank you very much for looking into the RFC series, very much > > appreciated. Secondly, about above, the GQSPI model in QEMU transfers from 2 > > locations in the file, in 1 location the transfer referred to above is done, in > > another location the transfer through the txfifo is done. The location where > > transfer referred to above is done will not need any modifications (and will > > thus work equally well as it does currently). > > Please explain this a little bit. How does your RFC series handle > cases as described in table 24-22, where the 6 dummy cycles are split > into 2 transfers, with one transfer using tx fifo, and the other one > using hardware dummy cycle generation? Sorry, I missunderstod. You are right, that won't work. Best regards, Francisco Iglesias > > > > > Now that above has is cleared out, and since I know you are heavily loaded with > > other higher prio tasks, lets wait for the maintainers to also have a look into > > the RFC (understandibly this can take some time due to that they also are > > heavily loaded). > > Yes, maintainers are pretty much silent on this topic. > > However may I ask you to provide more details on my questions below on > booting U-Boot/Linux with the QEMU? > > You can post patches to add documentation for zynqmp in > docs/system/arm, or once I get a working instructions, I could do that > too. Much appreciated. > > > > > Best regards, > > Francisco Iglesias > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for the commands is because no request has been made for them. Also there is > > > > > > > > one controller that has support. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Definitely it's not "no request". Nearly all SPI flashes support the > > > > > > > Fast Read (0Bh) command today, and 0Bh requires a dummy cycle. This is > > > > > > > "seriously broken" for those case 1 type controllers because they > > > > > > > cannot read anything from the m25p80 model at all. Unless the guest > > > > > > > software being tested only uses Read (03h) command which is not > > > > > > > affected. But I can't find a software that uses Read instead of Fast > > > > > > > Read. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The issue you pointed out that we require the total number of dummy > > > > > > > > > bits should be multiple of 8 is true, that's why I added the > > > > > > > > > unimplemented log message in this series (patch 2/3/4) to warn users > > > > > > > > > if this expectation is not met. However this will not cause any issue > > > > > > > > > when running U-Boot or Linux, because both spi-nor drivers expect the > > > > > > > > > same assumption as we do here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See U-Boot spi_nor_read_data() and Linux spi_nor_spimem_read_data(), > > > > > > > > > there is a logic to calculate the dummy bytes needed for fast read > > > > > > > > > command: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /* convert the dummy cycles to the number of bytes */ > > > > > > > > > op.dummy.nbytes = (nor->read_dummy * op.dummy.buswidth) / 8; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Note the default dummy cycles configuration for all flashes I have > > > > > > > > > looked into as of today, meets the multiple of 8 assumption. On some > > > > > > > > > flashes the dummy cycle number is configurable, and if it's been > > > > > > > > > configured to be an odd value, it would not work on U-Boot/Linux in > > > > > > > > > the first place. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Things get complicated when interacting with different SPI or QSPI > > > > > > > > > > > flash controllers. There are major two cases: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Dummy bytes prepared by drivers, and wrote to the controller fifo. > > > > > > > > > > > For such case, driver will calculate the correct number of dummy > > > > > > > > > > > bytes and write them into the tx fifo. Fixing the m25p80 model will > > > > > > > > > > > fix flashes working with such controllers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Above can be fixed while still keeping the detailed dummy cycle implementation > > > > > > > > > > inside m25p80. Perhaps one of the following could be looked into: configurating > > > > > > > > > > the amount, letting the spi ctrl fetch the amount from m25p80 or by inheriting > > > > > > > > > > some functionality handling this in the SPI controller. Or a mixture of above. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please send patches to explain this in detail how this is going to > > > > > > > > > work. I am open to all possible solutions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In that case I suggest that you instead try with a device property > > > > > > > > 'model_dummy_bytes' used to select to convert the accurate dummy clock cycle > > > > > > > > count to dummy bytes inside m25p80. Below is an example on how to modify the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No this is wrong in my view. This is not like a DMA vs. PIO handling. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > decode_fast_read_cmd function (the other commands requiring dummy clock cycles > > > > > > > > can follow a similar pattern). This way the fifo mode will be able to work the > > > > > > > > way you desire while also keeping the current functionality intact. Suddenly > > > > > > > > removing functionality (features) will take users by surprise. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think we are removing any features. This is a fix to make the > > > > > > > model to be used by any SPI controllers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I pointed out, both U-Boot and Linux have the multiple of 8 > > > > > > > assumption for the dummy bit, which is the default configuration for > > > > > > > all flashes I have looked into so far. Can you please comment what use > > > > > > > case you want to support? I requested a U-Boot/Linux kernel testing in > > > > > > > the previous SST thread [1] against Xilinx GQSPI but there was no > > > > > > > response. > > > > > > > > > > > > In [2] instructions on how to boot u-boot/Linux is found. For building the > > > > > > various software components I followed the official doc in [3]. > > > > > > > > > > I see the following QEMU commands are used to test booting U-Boot/Linux: > > > > > > > > > > $ qemu-system-aarch64 -M xlnx-zcu102,secure=on,virtualization=on -m 4G > > > > > -serial stdio -display none -device loader,file=u-boot.elf -kernel > > > > > bl31.elf -device loader,addr=0x40000000,file=Image -device > > > > > loader,addr=0x2000000,file=system.dtb > > > > > > > > > > I am not sure where the system.dtb gets built from? > > > > > > > > It is the instructions in [2] to look into. 'system.dtb' is the kernel dtb for > > > > zcu102 ([2] has been fixed). I created [2] purely for you, so respectfully I > > > > will ask you to try a little first before asking for further guidance. > > > > > > > > > > I tried, but no success. I removed the "-device loader" part for > > > loading kernel image and the device tree, and only focused on booting > > > U-Boot. > > > > > > The ATF bl31.elf was built from > > > https://github.com/ARM-software/arm-trusted-firmware, by following > > > build instructions at > > > https://trustedfirmware-a.readthedocs.io/en/latest/plat/xilinx-zynqmp.html. > > > U-Boot was built from the upstream U-Boot. > > > > > > $ ./qemu-system-aarch64 -M xlnx-zcu102,secure=on,virtualization=on -m > > > 4G -serial stdio -display none -device loader,file=u-boot.elf -kernel > > > bl31.elf > > > ERROR: Incorrect XILINX IDCODE 0x0, maskid 0x4600093 > > > NOTICE: ATF running on XCZUUNKN/silicon v1/RTL0.0 at 0xfffea000 > > > NOTICE: BL31: v2.4(release):v2.4-228-g337e493 > > > NOTICE: BL31: Built : 21:18:14, Jan 20 2021 > > > ERROR: BL31: Platform Management API version error. Expected: v1.1 - > > > Found: v0.0 > > > ERROR: Error initializing runtime service sip_svc > > > > > > I also tried the Xilinx fork of ATF from > > > https://github.com/Xilinx/arm-trusted-firmware, by following build > > > instructions at > > > https://xilinx-wiki.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/A/pages/18842305/Build+ARM+Trusted+Firmware+ATF > > > > > > $ ./qemu-system-aarch64 -M xlnx-zcu102,secure=on,virtualization=on -m > > > 4G -serial stdio -display none -device loader,file=u-boot.elf -kernel > > > bl31.elf > > > ERROR: Incorrect XILINX IDCODE 0x0, maskid 0x4600093 > > > NOTICE: ATF running on XCZUUNKN/silicon v1/RTL0.0 at 0xfffea000 > > > NOTICE: BL31: v2.2(release):xilinx-v2020.2 > > > NOTICE: BL31: Built : 21:52:38, Jan 20 2021 > > > ERROR: BL31: Platform Management API version error. Expected: v1.1 - > > > Found: v0.0 > > > ERROR: Error initializing runtime service sip_svc > > > > > > Then I tried to build a U-Boot from the Xilinx fork at > > > https://github.com/Xilinx/u-boot-xlnx/, still no success. > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Francisco Iglesias > > > > > > > > [1] qemu/docs/system/deprecated.rst > > > > [2] https://github.com/franciscoIglesias/qemu-cmdline/blob/master/xlnx-zcu102-atf-u-boot-linux.md > > > > > > Regards, > Bin