From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Chee, Tien Fong <tien.fong.chee@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 14:06:45 +0000
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v7 1/7] ARM: socfpga: Description on FPGA
 bitstream type and file name for Arria 10
In-Reply-To: <0c6e5ee06f9c884c4e4b8f8c5e26f3d7fd32a2f1.camel@linux.intel.com>
References: <1548946304-17460-1-git-send-email-tien.fong.chee@intel.com>
 <1548946304-17460-2-git-send-email-tien.fong.chee@intel.com>
 <acbfe6b1-413a-9fb1-7e23-dc06613bf48a@denx.de>
 <1548992898.11133.13.camel@intel.com>
 <581c2c6c-eb0c-8f31-dbba-a966cb93ba27@denx.de>
 <1549036942.11363.34.camel@intel.com>
 <22489ae2-80e1-1ece-c241-ee07277f62d5@denx.de>
 <1549863369.10080.22.camel@intel.com>
 <1ee58ccd-d7b3-850b-1b5b-c06a71356db6@denx.de>
 <1549904509.10080.82.camel@intel.com>
 <5d760e925f48aca5a20e3419c90bbfbcb36a0179.camel@intel.com>
 <1549964128.10168.5.camel@intel.com>
 <c05becf0-1bbd-a1ce-ab5d-3129dad20c1d@denx.de>
 <1549966432.10168.9.camel@intel.com>
 <5a03dfd2-06bd-2be4-082f-487daaa1660c@denx.de>
 <0c6e5ee06f9c884c4e4b8f8c5e26f3d7fd32a2f1.camel@linux.intel.com>
Message-ID: <1549980404.10168.12.camel@intel.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On Tue, 2019-02-12 at 05:49 -0800, Dalon L Westergreen wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-02-12 at 11:17 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > 
> > On 2/12/19 11:13 AM, Chee, Tien Fong wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Tue, 2019-02-12 at 10:43 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On 2/12/19 10:35 AM, Chee, Tien Fong wrote:
> > > > [...]
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > my preference for the fit image would be
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > ...
> > > > > > images {
> > > > > >   fpga at 1 {
> > > > > > 	description = "FPGA Periph";
> > > > > > 	...
> > > > > > 	type = "fpga_periph";
> > > > > > 	...
> > > > > >   }
> > > > > >   fpga at 2 {
> > > > > > 	description = "FPGA Core";
> > > > > > 	...
> > > > > > 	type = "fpga" or
> > > > > > "fpga_core";
> > > > > I'm good with "fpga".
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 	...
> > > > > >   }
> > > > > > };
> > > > > > configurations {
> > > > > >   default = "config at 1"
> > > > > >   config at 1 {
> > > > > >       fpga = "fpga at 1";  // periph only
> > > > > >   };
> > > > > >   config at 2 {
> > > > > >       fpga = "fpga at 1", "fpga at 2";
> > > > > >   };
> > > > > > };
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > with the expectation that the order of fpga at 1 and fpga at 2 in
> > > > > > confi
> > > > > > g at 2
> > > > > > is not relevant.  the code should find the fpga_periph type
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > program
> > > > > > it first.  just my comment, i dont like rellying on the
> > > > > > order or
> > > > > > name.
> > > > > I can add support for above implementation although this adds
> > > > > more
> > > > > complexity to the driver.
> > > > You can have fpga node and e.g. fpga-name node in the
> > > > configurations
> > > > section to discern which phandle there is the core and which is
> > > > the
> > > > peripheral RBF. Would that work ?
> > > > 
> > > So something like that?
> > > 
> > > ...
> > > 
> > > images {
> > >   fpga-periph at 1 {
> > > 	description = "FPGA Periph";
> > > 	...
> > > 	type = "fpga_periph";
> > Do we need a new type for the periph/core distinction ?
> not really, using the node name is fine with me as is shown below.
> when i suggested that my intent was to allow the name to be
> independant of the node name still envisioning scenarios where
> the fit image has multiple fpga images.
Great, then i will work out the codes which able to identify the
bitstream type based on the node name "fpga-core" and "fpga-periph"

Thanks for finalizing the implementation.
> 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > 	...
> > >   }
> > >   fpga-core at 2 {
> > > 	description = "FPGA Core";
> > > 	...
> > > 	type = "fpga";
> > > 	...
> > >   }
> > > };
> > > configurations {
> > >   default = "config at 1"
> > >   config at 1 {
> > >       fpga = "fpga-periph at 1";  // periph only
> > >   };
> > >   config at 2 {
> > >       fpga = "fpga-periph at 1", "fpga-core at 2";
> > >   };
> > > };
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Marek, are you OK with this implementation?
> > > > Looks OK to me. Dalon ?
> > > > 
> > > > [...]
> >