From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] What if ATF can be part of U-Boot source, like SPL?
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 18:50:14 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <543892ed970bae77@bloch.sibelius.xs4all.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMty3ZDwHbkNr28m8Q1Q_F716S1tCU0Fhn3aurpWvkK58WyCXA@mail.gmail.com> (message from Jagan Teki on Sat, 29 Jun 2019 20:32:00 +0530)
> From: Jagan Teki <jagan@amarulasolutions.com>
> Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 20:32:00 +0530
>
> In terms of code maintenance and development feasibility it is always
> a better approach to have out-of-tree code or binary to be part of
> in-house source tree.
I disagree. This strategy often leads to diverging codebases where
local improvements are not fed back upstream and/or not picking up
bug- and security fixes from upstream.
It also means that developers of non-ARM U-Boot platforms will have to
check out the full ATF source tree.
> This is what exactly it was done for SPL, if I'm not wrong. So can we
> do the same thing for ATF on ARM64 SoCs?
SPL and U-Boot proper share a lot of code. I'd say it is totally
different.
> We are using ATF (on Allwinner) to switch EL3 to EL2 for start loading
> U-Boot proper and minimal PSCI, PMIC initialization. So assuming the
> functionality of ATF (like here) is limited so the code it require can
> be limited too, so why can't this code to be part of U-Boot tree?
>
> This would ultimately avoid out-off-tree ATF builds with associated
> variable exporting during u-boot builds.
I don't see this as a huge issue. For OpenBSD we already have the
(small) build infrastructure to handle this.
> More over this idea would also help to design a single-step bootloader
> where it can't depends on out-of-tree sources.
>
> Code sync from ATF source to U-Boot can be possible in-terms licensing
> point-of-view since ATF licensed under BSD-3-Clause.
>
> I'm thinking this can be a worth-idea to look at it and I'm sure It
> may require some hard changes and other things to consider but just
> posted to understand how hard or feasible or meaningful it is?
>
> Feel free for any comments?
I don't think this makes a lot of sense. Apart from what I wrote
above, some platforms use U-Boot as a payload for ATF (or TF-A as it
is called now) instead of the other way around. It also makes it
difficult to do development on platforms where ATF sources have not
yet been upstreamed.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-29 16:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-29 15:02 [U-Boot] What if ATF can be part of U-Boot source, like SPL? Jagan Teki
2019-06-29 16:50 ` Mark Kettenis [this message]
2019-06-29 18:38 ` Marek Vasut
2019-06-29 18:49 ` André Przywara
2019-06-29 23:03 ` Marek Vasut
2019-06-30 1:38 ` André Przywara
2019-07-02 18:32 ` Marek Vasut
2019-09-04 2:17 ` Simon Glass
2019-09-04 17:32 ` Andre Przywara
2019-09-04 17:56 ` Marek Vasut
2019-09-05 0:54 ` André Przywara
2019-09-05 12:26 ` Marek Vasut
2019-09-05 23:14 ` André Przywara
2019-06-30 11:15 ` Wolfgang Denk
2019-06-30 13:57 ` Tom Rini
2019-06-30 14:03 ` Marek Vasut
2019-06-30 14:07 ` Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi
2019-06-30 14:17 ` Tom Rini
2019-06-30 14:20 ` Marek Vasut
2019-06-30 14:29 ` Tom Rini
2019-06-30 14:50 ` Marek Vasut
2019-09-04 2:51 ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-09-04 23:10 ` Tom Rini
[not found] <20190904134501.7980e45b@donnerap.cambridge.arm.com>
2019-09-05 1:17 ` Matteo Carlini
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=543892ed970bae77@bloch.sibelius.xs4all.nl \
--to=mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/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