From: Sean Anderson <seanga2@gmail.com>
To: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>, Rick Chen <rickchen36@gmail.com>
Cc: Rick Chen <rick@andestech.com>,
ycliang@andestech.com, u-boot@lists.denx.de, sjg@chromium.org,
xypron.glpk@gmx.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] riscv: spl: Introduce SPL_OPENSBI_OS_BOOT
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2022 19:31:39 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a8111b1d-76ee-56fa-7da0-99eea53cda8d@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221212150315.GS3787616@bill-the-cat>
On 12/12/22 10:03, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 02:45:10PM +0800, Rick Chen wrote:
>> Hi Tom
>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 08:48:37AM -0500, Sean Anderson wrote:
>>>> On 12/7/22 01:23, Rick Chen wrote:
>>>>> In RISC-V, it only provide normal mode booting currently.
>>>>> To speed up the booting process, here provide SPL_OPENSBI_OS_BOOT
>>>>> to achieve this feature which will be call Fast-Boot mode. By
>>>>
>>>> Can you name this something different. We already have something called
>>>> fastboot in-tree (the Android-derived protocol) and there's a Microsoft
>>>> technology called fastboot (some kind of hibernation). "OS Boot" isn't
>>>> very specific either, since we (almost always) boot an OS. Maybe "Eagle
>>>> mode" by analogy to Falcon mode, which lets SPL directly boot an OS.
>>>>
>>>> (Is this substantially different from falcon mode anyway?)
>>>
>>> I was kind of wondering if this is different, really, from Falcon Mode.
>>> Falcon Mode didn't initially have to factor in other-firmware as that's
>>> not a hard requirement on arm32 like it is on arm64 or risc-v. But my
>>> first read of this was that it seems like the RISC-V specific side of
>>> doing Falcon Mode and dealing with the prior stage needs correctly.
>>>
>>
>> Yes. It is a little bit different from the Falcon mode (SPL_OS_BOOT=y).
>> When I try to enable SPL_OS_BOOT, it will encounter that SYS_SPL_ARGS_ADDR and
>> jump_to_image_linux() shall be defined but they are un-necessary for RISC-V.
>> Because the flow of OpenSBI and SPL_OS_BOOT are totally different code
>> flow in board_init_r() of common/spl/spl.c.
>> That is why I added a new symbol called SPL_OPENSBI_OS_BOOT for this
>> RISC-V fast boot implementation.
>
> Those sound like fairly minor challenges for the same fundamental
> concept. We have SYS_SPL_ARGS_ADDR for "where is the device tree to
> pass along". We might need to do a little code re-factoring here. But
> maybe also a little bit of explaining why we wouldn't be booting to the
> OS directly but instead passing back to openSBI to do this? That's not
> normally how RISC-V boots the OS, right? Or am I miss-understanding
> something here?
>
The usual process is
ROM -> SPL -> SBI -> U-Boot -> Linux
Where SPL loads SBI and U-Boot and tells SBI "please run U-Boot after you are
done booting". But the idea here is to load Linux instead of U-Boot. I think
this is pretty similar to Falcon mode. Actually, when CONFIG_SPL_OPENSBI is
enabled, I think it's reasonable for falcon mode to do exactly that. People
who want the SPL -> Linux path can disable SPL_OPENSBI.
--Sean
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-13 0:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-07 6:23 [PATCH 1/4] riscv: spl: Introduce SPL_OPENSBI_OS_BOOT Rick Chen
2022-12-07 6:23 ` [PATCH 2/4] riscv: dts: Support Fast-Boot Rick Chen
2022-12-07 6:23 ` [PATCH 3/4] riscv: ae350: Support Fast Boot Rick Chen
2022-12-07 6:23 ` [PATCH 4/4] doc: ae350: Add Fast Boot description Rick Chen
2022-12-09 13:48 ` [PATCH 1/4] riscv: spl: Introduce SPL_OPENSBI_OS_BOOT Sean Anderson
2022-12-09 22:07 ` Tom Rini
2022-12-12 6:45 ` Rick Chen
2022-12-12 15:03 ` Tom Rini
2022-12-13 0:31 ` Sean Anderson [this message]
2022-12-13 0:42 ` Rick Chen
2022-12-13 16:24 ` Tom Rini
2022-12-14 2:01 ` Sean Anderson
2022-12-14 6:32 ` Rick Chen
2022-12-13 1:31 ` Rick Chen
2022-12-12 7:49 ` Rick Chen
2022-12-12 15:52 ` Tom Rini
2022-12-13 2:06 ` Rick Chen
2022-12-13 16:27 ` Tom Rini
2022-12-14 0:49 ` Rick Chen
2022-12-14 1:54 ` Tom Rini
2022-12-14 2:14 ` Rick Chen
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=a8111b1d-76ee-56fa-7da0-99eea53cda8d@gmail.com \
--to=seanga2@gmail.com \
--cc=rick@andestech.com \
--cc=rickchen36@gmail.com \
--cc=sjg@chromium.org \
--cc=trini@konsulko.com \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
--cc=xypron.glpk@gmx.de \
--cc=ycliang@andestech.com \
/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