From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from phobos.denx.de (phobos.denx.de [85.214.62.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BB59E7C4E7 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2023 17:19:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 546EF8758C; Wed, 4 Oct 2023 19:18:50 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="u+CIuR8/"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by phobos.denx.de (Postfix, from userid 109) id 0E3E5874E8; Wed, 4 Oct 2023 19:17:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63A0486ED4 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2023 19:17:00 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mwalle@kernel.org Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 098A0615E8; Wed, 4 Oct 2023 17:16:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D1D8EC433C7; Wed, 4 Oct 2023 17:16:54 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1696439817; bh=65wN/OPk7VyVnaoHcf2mpY7v09FcPKJdaCZKb1Bz7dE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=u+CIuR8/ePugGDtCtrHAGraYMIAqvKSDUylA0pm9xZwieyDbL+0AGbIHBB9wXKaHT OKhgEwYHAaXPM+9f2oWHe1E5tjE2I9l2qdoGK4Z0x4i6dvOyMaBpvTR3yO565gMSFZ XDwTKOli+3i+5H3snBaI//sXT+IJMsAiaZsMwDm9gD2WFm8Uxp3zrSQBOQOoosUdn7 rjRYzgNsuCTkAnPZV3rB/gF92SFvBQKwOOd43tKs/Sq+OvvZG6SImrgu/1xLkkEYK0 gtfkhX3jt4WO7NzXL0jpoychFyHG0l8RMBpkB7nxyUIg8B/PQF19t0h/ozXWxql/KU YVCfGDhLFSfNw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2023 19:16:52 +0200 From: Michael Walle To: Simon Glass Cc: miquel.raynal@bootlin.com, conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, ptyadav@amazon.de, rafal@milecki.pl, richard@nod.at, robh+dt@kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, trini@konsulko.com, u-boot@lists.denx.de, vigneshr@ti.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: mtd: fixed-partitions: Add binman compatible In-Reply-To: References: <20231004093620.2b1d6917@xps-13> <20231004113458.531124-1-mwalle@kernel.org> Message-ID: <9e588e3ec8c0c321a2861723d0d42b9a@kernel.org> X-Sender: mwalle@kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 04 Oct 2023 19:18:39 +0200 X-BeenThere: u-boot@lists.denx.de X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: U-Boot discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Sender: "U-Boot" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.103.8 at phobos.denx.de X-Virus-Status: Clean Hi, >> >> Add a compatible string for binman, so we can extend fixed-partitions >> >> in various ways. >> > >> > I've been thinking at the proper way to describe the binman partitions. >> > I am wondering if we should really extend the fixed-partitions >> > schema. This description is really basic and kind of supposed to remain >> > like that. Instead, I wonder if we should not just keep the binman >> > compatible alone, like many others already. This way it would be very clear >> > what is expected and allowed in both cases. I am thinking about >> > something like that: >> > >> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm4908-partitions.yaml >> > >> > this file is also referenced there (but this patch does the same, which >> > is what I'd expect): >> > >> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/partitions.yaml >> > >> > I'll let the binding maintainers judge whether they think it's >> > relevant, it's not a strong opposition. >> >> What is the overall goal here? To replace the current binman node >> which is >> usually contained in the -u-boot.dtsi files? If one is using binman to >> create an image, is it expected that one needs to adapt the DT in >> linux? >> Or will it still be a seperate -u-boot.dtsi? > Because in the latter >> case >> I see that there will be conflicts because you have to overwrite the >> flash node. Or will it be a seperate node with all the information >> duplicated? > > The goal is simply to have a full binding for firmware layout, such > that firmware images can be created, examined and updated. The > -u-boot.dtsi files are a stopgap while we sort out a real binding. > They should eventually go away. You haven't answered whether this node should be a seperate binman node - or if you'll reuse the existing flash (partitions) node(s) and add any missing property there. If it's the latter, I don't think compatible = "binman", "fixed-partitions"; is correct. >> Maybe (a more complete) example would be helpful. > > Can you please be a bit more specific? What is missing from the > example? Like a complete (stripped) DTS. Right now I just see how the individual node looks like. But with a complete example DTS, my question from above would have been answered. What if a board uses eMMC to store the firmware binaries? Will that then be a subnode to the eMMC device? -michael