Re: [PATCH] arm64: zynqmp: Do not describe u-boot.itb if SPL is disabled

[Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>]

Hi,

On 3/14/24 09:34, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
> Hi Michal
> 
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 at 09:01, Ilias Apalodimas
> <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 at 08:42, Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/12/24 20:12, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 12 Mar 2024 at 17:55, Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/12/24 07:14, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Michal
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apologies for the late reply
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 at 09:48, Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/5/24 16:47, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 05:18:42PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>>>>>>> There is no reason to describe u-boot.itb on system without SPL. Pretty
>>>>>>>>> much this is cover all systems which are using only boot.bin which contains
>>>>>>>>> all images inside.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>      board/xilinx/common/board.c | 2 +-
>>>>>>>>>      1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/board/xilinx/common/board.c b/board/xilinx/common/board.c
>>>>>>>>> index 9641ed307b75..4f38b7d27684 100644
>>>>>>>>> --- a/board/xilinx/common/board.c
>>>>>>>>> +++ b/board/xilinx/common/board.c
>>>>>>>>> @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ struct efi_fw_image fw_images[] = {
>>>>>>>>>                 .image_index = 1,
>>>>>>>>>         },
>>>>>>>>>      #endif
>>>>>>>>> -#if defined(XILINX_UBOOT_IMAGE_GUID)
>>>>>>>>> +#if defined(XILINX_UBOOT_IMAGE_GUID) && defined(CONFIG_SPL_FS_LOAD_PAYLOAD_NAME)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What happens if this is defined with CONFIG_SPL_FS_LOAD_PAYLOAD_NAME="" ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your comment is valid but I am not aware about any CONFIG_IS, etc which checks
>>>>>>> that string is not empty. If name is "" it will return yes and second image is
>>>>>>> doing to be defined.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But I found handling in the code like this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      36 #ifdef CONFIG_DEFAULT_FDT_FILE
>>>>>>>      37                 if (strlen(CONFIG_DEFAULT_FDT_FILE)) {
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> which can be used in my second patch not to describe second image in
>>>>>>> set_dfu_alt_info() if string is empty.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, I think that's ok. The problem is that if we merge this as-is, we
>>>>>> would have to disable CONFIG_SPL_FS_FAT to make this work, which is a
>>>>>> bit misleading
>>>>>
>>>>> As Heinrich said not just this if you want to do it like this.
>>>>> I think you will simply disable the whole SPL which will disable this symbol too.
>>>>> But from my perspective SPL payload name is driving this option. Data can end up
>>>>> on partition or in raw mode but for dfu you need to use the name.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but isn't SPL selected by the Kconfig automatically? I can't seem
>>>> to be able to disable it for the kria platforms
>>>
>>> Not in upstream but via your/AMD build in meta-ts.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Michal
>>>
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
> 
> Trying to compile xilinx_zynqmp_kria_defconfig with CONFIG_SPL unset
> blows up with
> 
>   HOSTCC  scripts/dtc/dtc-lexer.lex.o
>    HOSTCC  scripts/dtc/dtc-parser.tab.o
>    COPY    u-boot.its
> cp: missing destination file operand after 'u-boot.its'
> Try 'cp --help' for more information.
> make: *** [Makefile:1405: u-boot.its] Error 1
> make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>    HOSTLD  scripts/dtc/dtc

That's because u-boot.itb is selected in .config as target binary.
Because that entry is string, setup by default when SPL is enabled via 
defconfig. Then when you disable SPL via defconfig default setting is not 
changed and is still at origin value.
CONFIG_BUILD_TARGET="u-boot.itb"

If you do sed -i '/CONFIG_SPL/d' configs/xilinx_zynqmp_kria_defconfig
you will get that CONFIG_BUILD_TARGET=""
which is correct value without SPL.

Thanks,
Michal