[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] common: image: update boot_get_fpga to support arbitrary fpga image

[Dalon Westergreen <dwesterg@gmail.com>]

On Mon, 2017-02-20 at 10:22 +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> On 19.2.2017 21:58, Dalon Westergreen wrote:
> > 
> > On Sun, 2017-02-19 at 21:49 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > 
> > > On 02/19/2017 09:43 PM, Dalon Westergreen wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Sun, 2017-02-19 at 21:07 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On 02/19/2017 08:49 PM, Dalon Westergreen wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The implementation of boot_get_fpga only supported one fpga family.
> > > > > > This modification allows for any of the fpga devices supported by
> > > > > > fpga_load to be used.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Dalon Westergreen <dwesterg@gmail.com>
> > > > > 
> > > > > +CC Xilinx friends :)
> > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > ?common/image.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> > > > > > ?1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > diff --git a/common/image.c b/common/image.c
> > > > > > index 0f88984..792d371 100644
> > > > > > --- a/common/image.c
> > > > > > +++ b/common/image.c
> > > > > > @@ -1306,7 +1306,7 @@ int boot_get_setup(bootm_headers_t *images,
> > > > > > uint8_t
> > > > > > arch,
> > > > > > ?}
> > > > > > ?
> > > > > > ?#if IMAGE_ENABLE_FIT
> > > > > > -#if defined(CONFIG_FPGA) && defined(CONFIG_FPGA_XILINX)
> > > > > > +#if defined(CONFIG_FPGA)
> > > > > > ?int boot_get_fpga(int argc, char * const argv[], bootm_headers_t
> > > > > > *images,
> > > > > > ?		??uint8_t arch, const ulong *ld_start, ulong *
> > > > > > const
> > > > > > ld_len)
> > > > > > ?{
> > > > > > @@ -1318,7 +1318,8 @@ int boot_get_fpga(int argc, char * const
> > > > > > argv[],
> > > > > > bootm_headers_t *images,
> > > > > > ?	int err;
> > > > > > ?	int devnum = 0; /* TODO support multi fpga platforms */
> > > > > > ?	const fpga_desc * const desc = fpga_get_desc(devnum);
> > > > > > -	xilinx_desc *desc_xilinx = desc->devdesc;
> > > > > > +	xilinx_desc *desc_xilinx;
> > > > > > +	bitstream_type bstype;
> > > > > > ?
> > > > > > ?	/* Check to see if the images struct has a FIT
> > > > > > configuration */
> > > > > > ?	if (!genimg_has_config(images)) {
> > > > > > @@ -1365,22 +1366,28 @@ int boot_get_fpga(int argc, char * const
> > > > > > argv[],
> > > > > > bootm_headers_t *images,
> > > > > > ?			return fit_img_result;
> > > > > > ?		}
> > > > > > ?
> > > > > > -		if (img_len >= desc_xilinx->size) {
> > > > > > +		switch (desc->devtype) {
> > > > > 
> > > > > Do we need the switch statement at all ? We can have full
> > > > > configuration
> > > > > as a default mode of operation and have something like
> > > > > 
> > > > > if (xilinx) {
> > > > > ?if (partial reconfiguration) {
> > > > > ? do_special_setup();
> > > > > ?}
> > > > > }
> > > > 
> > > > I only did the switch stuff b/c i envisioned a need for partial image
> > > > support for socfpga.
> > > 
> > > That'd be seriously cool :)
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > That said, i would suggest, as you mention, moving
> > > > this to platform specific code and perhaps an indication of the image
> > > > type
> > > > in the fitimage.
> > > 
> > > driver-specific code . It doesn't need to know the imagetype, just that
> > > the blob that you passed in is a partial-reconfiguration blob. I never
> > > really worked with P/R though, do you need some other metadata for that
> > > or is it contained in that P/R bitstream blob already ?
> > 
> > as far as i understand it, it is all in the blob.??All that is needed is
> > knowing
> > whether the blob is a full or partial image.??X seems to just use the image
> > size
> > to determine this, but that means having a table of all devices and their
> > respective full image size.??seems simpler to just specify the image type is
> > partial or not in the fitimage.
> 
> We did that for zynq when we did that for the first time. But not for
> zynqmp. Zynq is maybe still using it but it shouldn't now. It is not
> 100% reliable way. Definitely having DT property is the best option
> because you can add sort of "nop" which extend bitstream size and does
> nothing which breaks that checking.
> 
> For full u-boot there is loadb, loadbp, load and loadp to distinguish it.

That brings up an interesting point, right now the?fpga_loadbitstream doesn't
follow the same method as fpga_load for allowing multiple FPGA types to be
supported simultaneously. ?Would it not be prudent to move in that direction?
I believe only xilinx implements this right now.

--dalon

> Thanks,
> Michal
> 
> Thanks,
> Michal
>