From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Gibson Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/5] dtc: Document the dynamic plugin internals Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 16:33:34 +1000 Message-ID: <20160526063334.GH17226@voom.fritz.box> References: <1464112239-29856-1-git-send-email-pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> <1464112239-29856-4-git-send-email-pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> <5745F95F.6000600@gmail.com> <1151E0EF-B811-4C0B-858A-00810BE9BA42@konsulko.com> <20160526062848.GG17226@voom.fritz.box> <8CAE1792-841B-4048-B6B1-1F0F973E2E34@konsulko.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="iY5udFbGw2SsPZe4" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8CAE1792-841B-4048-B6B1-1F0F973E2E34-OWPKS81ov/FWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> Sender: devicetree-compiler-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Pantelis Antoniou Cc: frowand.list-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, Jon Loeliger , Grant Likely , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , Jan Luebbe , Sascha Hauer , Matt Porter , devicetree-compiler-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --iY5udFbGw2SsPZe4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 09:31:20AM +0300, Pantelis Antoniou wrote: > Hi David, >=20 > > On May 26, 2016, at 09:28 , David Gibson = wrote: > >=20 > > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 09:14:49AM +0300, Pantelis Antoniou wrote: > >> Hi Frank, > >>=20 > >>> On May 25, 2016, at 22:13 , Frank Rowand wro= te: > >>>=20 > >>> On 5/24/2016 10:50 AM, Pantelis Antoniou wrote: > >>>> Provides the document explaining the internal mechanics of > >>>> plugins and options. > >>>>=20 > >>>> Signed-off-by: Pantelis Antoniou > >>>> --- > >>>> Documentation/dt-object-internal.txt | 318 +++++++++++++++++++++++++= ++++++++++ > >>>> 1 file changed, 318 insertions(+) > >>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/dt-object-internal.txt > >>>>=20 > >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/dt-object-internal.txt b/Documentation/dt= -object-internal.txt > >>>> new file mode 100644 > >>>> index 0000000..d5b841e > >>>> --- /dev/null > >>>> +++ b/Documentation/dt-object-internal.txt > >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,318 @@ > >>>> +Device Tree Dynamic Object format internals > >>>> +------------------------------------------- > >>>> + > >>>> +The Device Tree for most platforms is a static representation of > >>>> +the hardware capabilities. This is insufficient for many platforms > >>>> +that need to dynamically insert device tree fragments to the > >>>> +running kernel's live tree. > >>>> + > >>>> +This document explains the the device tree object format and the > >>>> +modifications made to the device tree compiler, which make it possi= ble. > >>>> + > >>>> +1. Simplified Problem Definition > >>>> +-------------------------------- > >>>> + > >>>> +Assume we have a platform which boots using following simplified de= vice tree. > >>>> + > >>>> +---- foo.dts ------------------------------------------------------= ----------- > >>>> + /* FOO platform */ > >>>> + / { > >>>> + compatible =3D "corp,foo"; > >>>> + > >>>> + /* shared resources */ > >>>> + res: res { > >>>> + }; > >>>> + > >>>> + /* On chip peripherals */ > >>>> + ocp: ocp { > >>>> + /* peripherals that are always instantiated */ > >>>> + peripheral1 { ... }; > >>>> + }; > >>>> + }; > >>>> +---- foo.dts ------------------------------------------------------= ----------- > >>>> + > >>>> +We have a number of peripherals that after probing (using some unde= fined method) > >>>> +should result in different device tree configuration. > >>>> + > >>>> +We cannot boot with this static tree because due to the configurati= on of the > >>>> +foo platform there exist multiple conficting peripherals DT fragmen= ts. > >>>> + > >>>> +So for the bar peripheral we would have this: > >>>> + > >>>> +---- foo+bar.dts --------------------------------------------------= ----------- > >>>> + /* FOO platform + bar peripheral */ > >>>> + / { > >>>> + compatible =3D "corp,foo"; > >>>> + > >>>> + /* shared resources */ > >>>> + res: res { > >>>> + }; > >>>> + > >>>> + /* On chip peripherals */ > >>>> + ocp: ocp { > >>>> + /* peripherals that are always instantiated */ > >>>> + peripheral1 { ... }; > >>>> + > >>>> + /* bar peripheral */ > >>>> + bar { > >>>> + compatible =3D "corp,bar"; > >>>> + ... /* various properties and child nodes */ > >>>> + }; > >>>> + }; > >>>> + }; > >>>> +---- foo+bar.dts --------------------------------------------------= ----------- > >>>> + > >>>> +While for the baz peripheral we would have this: > >>>> + > >>>> +---- foo+baz.dts --------------------------------------------------= ----------- > >>>> + /* FOO platform + baz peripheral */ > >>>> + / { > >>>> + compatible =3D "corp,foo"; > >>>> + > >>>> + /* shared resources */ > >>>> + res: res { > >>>> + /* baz resources */ > >>>> + baz_res: res_baz { ... }; > >>>> + }; > >>>> + > >>>> + /* On chip peripherals */ > >>>> + ocp: ocp { > >>>> + /* peripherals that are always instantiated */ > >>>> + peripheral1 { ... }; > >>>> + > >>>> + /* baz peripheral */ > >>>> + baz { > >>>> + compatible =3D "corp,baz"; > >>>> + /* reference to another point in the tree */ > >>>> + ref-to-res =3D <&baz_res>; > >>>> + ... /* various properties and child nodes */ > >>>> + }; > >>>> + }; > >>>> + }; > >>>> +---- foo+baz.dts --------------------------------------------------= ----------- > >>>> + > >>>> +We note that the baz case is more complicated, since the baz periph= eral needs to > >>>> +reference another node in the DT tree. > >>>> + > >>>> +2. Device Tree Object Format Requirements > >>>> +----------------------------------------- > >>>> + > >>>> +Since the device tree is used for booting a number of very differen= t hardware > >>>> +platforms it is imperative that we tread very carefully. > >>>> + > >>>> +2.a) No changes to the Device Tree binary format for the base tree.= We cannot > >>>> +modify the tree format at all and all the information we require sh= ould be > >>>> +encoded using device tree itself. We can add nodes that can be safe= ly ignored > >>>> +by both bootloaders and the kernel. The plugin dtb's are optionally= tagged > >>>> +with a different magic number in the header but otherwise they too = are simple > >>>> +blobs. > >>>> + > >>>> +2.b) Changes to the DTS source format should be absolutely minimal,= and should > >>>> +only be needed for the DT fragment definitions, and not the base bo= ot DT. > >>>> + > >>>> +2.c) An explicit option should be used to instruct DTC to generate = the required > >>>> +information needed for object resolution. Platforms that don't use = the > >>>> +dynamic object format can safely ignore it. > >>>> + > >>>> +2.d) Finally, DT syntax changes should be kept to a minimum. It sho= uld be > >>>> +possible to express everything using the existing DT syntax. > >>>> + > >>>> +3. Implementation > >>>> +----------------- > >>>> + > >>>> +The basic unit of addressing in Device Tree is the phandle. Turns o= ut it's > >>>> +relatively simple to extend the way phandles are generated and refe= renced > >>>> +so that it's possible to dynamically convert symbolic references (l= abels) > >>>> +to phandle values. This is a valid assumption as long as the author= uses > >>>> +reference syntax and does not assign phandle values manually (which= might > >>>> +be a problem with decompiled source files). > >>>> + > >>>> +We can roughly divide the operation into two steps. > >>>> + > >>>> +3.a) Compilation of the base board DTS file using the '-@' option > >>>> +generates a valid DT blob with an added __symbols__ node at the roo= t node, > >>>> +containing a list of all nodes that are marked with a label. > >>>> + > >>>> +Using the foo.dts file above the following node will be generated; > >>>> + > >>>> +$ dtc -@ -O dtb -o foo.dtb -b 0 foo.dts > >>>> +$ fdtdump foo.dtb > >>>> +... > >>>> +/ { > >>>> + ... > >>>> + res { > >>>> + ... > >>>> + phandle =3D <0x00000001>; > >>>> + ... > >>>> + }; > >>>> + ocp { > >>>> + ... > >>>> + phandle =3D <0x00000002>; > >>>> + ... > >>>> + }; > >>>> + __symbols__ { > >>>> + res=3D"/res"; > >>>> + ocp=3D"/ocp"; > >>>> + }; > >>>> +}; > >>>> + > >>>> +Notice that all the nodes that had a label have been recorded, and = that > >>>> +phandles have been generated for them. > >>>> + > >>>> +This blob can be used to boot the board normally, the __symbols__ n= ode will > >>>> +be safely ignored both by the bootloader and the kernel (the only l= oss will > >>>> +be a few bytes of memory and disk space). > >>>> + > >>>> +3.b) The Device Tree fragments must be compiled with the same optio= n but they > >>>> +must also have a tag (/plugin/) that allows undefined references to= nodes > >>>> +that are not present at compilation time to be recorded so that the= runtime > >>>> +loader can fix them. > >>>> + > >>>> +So the bar peripheral's DTS format would be of the form: > >>>> + > >>>> +/dts-v1/ /plugin/; /* allow undefined references and record them */ > >>>> +/ { > >>>> + .... /* various properties for loader use; i.e. part id etc. */ > >>>> + fragment@0 { > >>>> + target =3D <&ocp>; > >>>> + __overlay__ { > >>>> + /* bar peripheral */ > >>>> + bar { > >>>> + compatible =3D "corp,bar"; > >>>> + ... /* various properties and child nodes */ > >>>> + } > >>>=20 > >>> }; > >>>=20 > >>>> + }; > >>>> + }; > >>>> +}; > >>>=20 > >>> Other than the fact that the above syntax is already in the Linux > >>> kernel overlay implementation, is there a need for the target > >>> property and the __overlay__ node? I haven't figured out what > >>> extra value they provide. > >>>=20 > >>> Without those added, the overlay dts becomes simpler (though for a > >>> multi-node target path example this would be more complex unless a la= bel > >>> was used for the target node): > >>>=20 > >>> +/dts-v1/ /plugin/; /* allow undefined references and record them */ > >>> +/ { > >>> + .... /* various properties for loader use; i.e. part id etc. */ > >>> + ocp { > >>> + /* bar peripheral */ > >>> + bar { > >>> + compatible =3D "corp,bar"; > >>> + ... /* various properties and child nodes */ > >>> + }; > >>> + }; > >>> +}; > >>>=20 > >>=20 > >> No. > >>=20 > >> That only works if the overlay is applied in a single platform. > >>=20 > >> I have working cases where the same overlay is applied on a ppc and a = x86 > >> platform. > >=20 > > Huh? How so.. > >=20 >=20 > Yes, it does work. Yes it=E2=80=99s being used right now. It is a very va= lid use case. >=20 > Think carrier boards on enterprise routers, plugging to a main board > that=E2=80=99s either ppc or x86 (or anything else for that matter). Sorry, I wasn't clear. I have no problem believing overlays can be applied on multiple platforms. What I can't see is how Frank's format breaks that. AFAICT it contains exactly the same information in a simpler encoding. --=20 David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson --iY5udFbGw2SsPZe4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJXRpi+AAoJEGw4ysog2bOSERcP/1BTEFky30x9bbclhd/1jvyi uDV7OXZXC9CO3dmSe4bTkXUqRnApG/xkBxztX2J611YnaXgdfWiDk7iUZz7C+rym R5TudLvJtIrfwRXel/iTGbRTENTevcSjxbawrqo4DULHqE0U78k/Y4gFC8mfwZOx 4Dgb7Sci0V75Yi+MuQsuww387HdXa7nMf8sh2aMwXeMyC2k1Sh2GaSpLsf5jlg3i VP9TGPx4qNGGOci7AaDOdN6SX8wvCSDC6F8kaPpLiHy4968Dj5snDBMaVH8Itwc/ DYDSnM8osDeXz4xnGRmSH7iCwnSfGcLsP5Ki/in0wPUUwoc07mdFXMogfmmaokGg 3MWSZ1jb0MLcdz9nrfvKBTjY6mPqBL7f9Q0bIexCvtSvA2azhhrfaWvACRydwjcy nqzGfKdKGQTzaY+Z8QPiazzOhYyQ7BNtgTSUcgJyv9RVqP/9sJwuW0AQAl7B0NC6 YMJvkuL9iIQjtreTDWq94rlMNuzaqVve7N/ivYhT4i/RFadirpCJmkS63lM/tswN k7uglZWaH/coPMa1RtMiaBs44NPhlnRz9p3EvY3r32pMohV8oBd6qQKl7fqefZke vC8gfgSfEiekA61vg0AUlwNJ78tV+nn90kDVhwXkkOheYYb4VXzfHl8RHbIS+E15 LQHR49tTfgny27+D/7G0 =zN2e -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --iY5udFbGw2SsPZe4--