[U-Boot] [PATCH] dfu: Limit dfu_mmc to non-SPL case

[U-Boot] [PATCH] dfu: Limit dfu_mmc to non-SPL case

[Faiz Abbas]

Since 82b9dc63 ("Only build cli_readline.o for CMDLINE on non-SPL"),
cli_simple.c is only being built for non-SPL case. However, dfu_mmc
requires cli_simple.c to build and dfu fails to build for SPL when
CONFIG_HUSH_PARSER is disabled.

Therefore, limit dfu_mmc to non-SPL case only.

Signed-off-by: Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@ti.com>
---
 drivers/dfu/Makefile | 2 ++
 drivers/dfu/dfu.c    | 2 ++
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/dfu/Makefile b/drivers/dfu/Makefile
index 61f2b71..5628734 100644
--- a/drivers/dfu/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/dfu/Makefile
@@ -6,7 +6,9 @@
 #
 
 obj-$(CONFIG_USB_FUNCTION_DFU) += dfu.o
+ifndef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD
 obj-$(CONFIG_DFU_MMC) += dfu_mmc.o
+endif
 obj-$(CONFIG_DFU_NAND) += dfu_nand.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_DFU_RAM) += dfu_ram.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_DFU_SF) += dfu_sf.o
diff --git a/drivers/dfu/dfu.c b/drivers/dfu/dfu.c
index 2c22b62..a16e10e 100644
--- a/drivers/dfu/dfu.c
+++ b/drivers/dfu/dfu.c
@@ -398,8 +398,10 @@ static int dfu_fill_entity(struct dfu_entity *dfu, char *s, int alt,
 
 	/* Specific for mmc device */
 	if (strcmp(interface, "mmc") == 0) {
+#ifndef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD
 		if (dfu_fill_entity_mmc(dfu, devstr, s))
 			return -1;
+#endif
 	} else if (strcmp(interface, "nand") == 0) {
 		if (dfu_fill_entity_nand(dfu, devstr, s))
 			return -1;
-- 
2.7.4

[U-Boot] [PATCH] dfu: Limit dfu_mmc to non-SPL case

[Tom Rini]

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 07:59:46PM +0530, Faiz Abbas wrote:

> Since 82b9dc63 ("Only build cli_readline.o for CMDLINE on non-SPL"),
> cli_simple.c is only being built for non-SPL case. However, dfu_mmc
> requires cli_simple.c to build and dfu fails to build for SPL when
> CONFIG_HUSH_PARSER is disabled.
> 
> Therefore, limit dfu_mmc to non-SPL case only.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@ti.com>
> ---
>  drivers/dfu/Makefile | 2 ++
>  drivers/dfu/dfu.c    | 2 ++
>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)

Does DFU for MMC make sense inside of SPL?  If so, you should follow
82b9dc63 and CONFIG_FSL_DDR_INTERACTIVE and bring back in cli_simple.o
(and cli_readline.o, if needed) for CONFIG_SPL_DFU_MMC or so.  If not,
we should more cleanly and clearly block out all non-DFU RAM cases for
SPL.  Thanks!

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20180214/f891fac4/attachment.sig>

[U-Boot] [PATCH] dfu: Limit dfu_mmc to non-SPL case

[Faiz Abbas]

Hi,

On Wednesday 14 February 2018 08:04 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 07:59:46PM +0530, Faiz Abbas wrote:
> 
>> Since 82b9dc63 ("Only build cli_readline.o for CMDLINE on non-SPL"),
>> cli_simple.c is only being built for non-SPL case. However, dfu_mmc
>> requires cli_simple.c to build and dfu fails to build for SPL when
>> CONFIG_HUSH_PARSER is disabled.
>>
>> Therefore, limit dfu_mmc to non-SPL case only.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@ti.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/dfu/Makefile | 2 ++
>>  drivers/dfu/dfu.c    | 2 ++
>>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> Does DFU for MMC make sense inside of SPL? 

No.

If so, you should follow
> 82b9dc63 and CONFIG_FSL_DDR_INTERACTIVE and bring back in cli_simple.o
> (and cli_readline.o, if needed) for CONFIG_SPL_DFU_MMC or so.  If not,
> we should more cleanly and clearly block out all non-DFU RAM cases for
> SPL.  Thanks!

Do you mean non-RAM DFU cases? Block out everything but RAM?


Thanks,
Faiz

[U-Boot] [PATCH] dfu: Limit dfu_mmc to non-SPL case

[Tom Rini]

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 08:15:15PM +0530, Faiz Abbas wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wednesday 14 February 2018 08:04 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 07:59:46PM +0530, Faiz Abbas wrote:
> > 
> >> Since 82b9dc63 ("Only build cli_readline.o for CMDLINE on non-SPL"),
> >> cli_simple.c is only being built for non-SPL case. However, dfu_mmc
> >> requires cli_simple.c to build and dfu fails to build for SPL when
> >> CONFIG_HUSH_PARSER is disabled.
> >>
> >> Therefore, limit dfu_mmc to non-SPL case only.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@ti.com>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/dfu/Makefile | 2 ++
> >>  drivers/dfu/dfu.c    | 2 ++
> >>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > 
> > Does DFU for MMC make sense inside of SPL? 
> 
> No.
> 
> If so, you should follow
> > 82b9dc63 and CONFIG_FSL_DDR_INTERACTIVE and bring back in cli_simple.o
> > (and cli_readline.o, if needed) for CONFIG_SPL_DFU_MMC or so.  If not,
> > we should more cleanly and clearly block out all non-DFU RAM cases for
> > SPL.  Thanks!
> 
> Do you mean non-RAM DFU cases? Block out everything but RAM?

Based on looking at what's in Kconfig at least, yes, only SPL+DFU RAM is
what's possible now.  So we should make the code more clearly show that.
Thanks!

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20180214/f77facc7/attachment.sig>

[U-Boot] [PATCH] dfu: Limit dfu_mmc to non-SPL case

[Lukasz Majewski]

Hi Faiz,

> Hi,
> 
> On Wednesday 14 February 2018 08:04 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 07:59:46PM +0530, Faiz Abbas wrote:
> >   
> >> Since 82b9dc63 ("Only build cli_readline.o for CMDLINE on
> >> non-SPL"), cli_simple.c is only being built for non-SPL case.
> >> However, dfu_mmc requires cli_simple.c to build and dfu fails to
> >> build for SPL when CONFIG_HUSH_PARSER is disabled.
> >>
> >> Therefore, limit dfu_mmc to non-SPL case only.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@ti.com>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/dfu/Makefile | 2 ++
> >>  drivers/dfu/dfu.c    | 2 ++
> >>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)  
> > 
> > Does DFU for MMC make sense inside of SPL?   
> 
> No.
> 
> If so, you should follow
> > 82b9dc63 and CONFIG_FSL_DDR_INTERACTIVE and bring back in
> > cli_simple.o (and cli_readline.o, if needed) for CONFIG_SPL_DFU_MMC
> > or so.  If not, we should more cleanly and clearly block out all
> > non-DFU RAM cases for SPL.  Thanks!  
> 
> Do you mean non-RAM DFU cases? Block out everything but RAM?

I think yes - only TI is using DFU RAM to download u-boot to configured
DDRAM and execute it from there.

So I agree with Tom, other gargets and DFU parts shall _not_ be enabled
for SPL (as it consumes a lot of space).

> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Faiz


Best regards,

Lukasz Majewski

--

DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20180214/5f4ebe41/attachment.sig>