From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 10:30:12 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 0/2] arm64: zynqmp: Cleanup defconfigs In-Reply-To: <74473878-5d7d-e112-3179-0731318cf551@xilinx.com> References: <48db3e3c-882b-b14b-a89f-166b344ec6d1@xilinx.com> <20191210135639.GU9549@bill-the-cat> <74473878-5d7d-e112-3179-0731318cf551@xilinx.com> Message-ID: <20191210153012.GW9549@bill-the-cat> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 04:24:09PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote: > On 10. 12. 19 14:56, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 01:40:42PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote: > >> Hi Tom, > >> > >> On 09. 12. 19 16:19, Michal Simek wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> over years a lot of new Xilinx ZynqMP board have been added to U-Boot with > >>> corresponding defconfigs. Also a lot of drivers have been moved to DM that > >>> we can make one generic configuration with one defconfig. > >>> Nand still needs to be validated that's why dc2/dc3 are not moved yet. > >>> > >>> Boards can be build like this: > >>> export DEVICE_TREE="avnet-ultra96-rev1" > >>> make xilinx_zynqmp_virt_defconfig > >>> make -j > >>> > >>> Series depends on patches sent before that's why here is full tree: > >>> https://github.com/michalsimek/u-boot/tree/20191209-mainline > >> > >> This series will require some changes in CI loops because right now > >> I didn't setup default device tree (CONFIG_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE) to > >> "force" everybody to properly pass DEVICE_TREE via command line. > >> I can't use OF_BOARD because then SPL is built without DT at all. > >> > >> How do you think I should handle it for CI loops? > >> 1. I can remove this configuration but it will be only one at the end > >> that's why not a good solution. > >> 2. Add generic option to run some commands before tests like export > >> DEVICE_TREE above > >> 3. provide different options for SPL/full u-boot how > >> OF_SEPARATE/OF_BOARD is handled. > > > > So, for CI are you wanting to test most device trees, or just one? > > All zynqmp dtses are built by default. Right, but for what I thought you're saying the real use is, you pass just a single device tree, right? If so, do you think we should loop over each, or just build one? > > Are > > we able to run one of these device trees via QEMU? > > zynqmp is covered just by buildman not by pytest. I have this on my todo > list for some time but there will be other issues with mainline qemu to > do so. OK, so something to improve for the future, and after we handle this "today" problem. > > If we can run the > > virt defconfig via qemu, we should just update/extend that stanza in the > > CI files to set DEVICE_TREE and exclude building it from the normal > > jobs. > > Based on next generation Xilinx Versal where we use OF_BOARD qemu is > generated DT for model self to ensure that only stuff which are emulated > are provided to SW. Logic for dt selection is quite simply. > https://github.com/Xilinx/u-boot-xlnx/blob/master/arch/arm/mach-versal/cpu.c#L112 > But Versal is not using SPL and SPL needs initial DT. Also standard > Xilinx boot flow on zynq/zynqmp is not using SPL and SPL is community > driven effort. > > At the end of the day I would like to use the same functionality across > boards. It means full u-boot should check one fixed location for DT > first with priority. For this OF_SEPARATE can be also used because > board_fdt_blob_setup can be overwritten for these cases too. > https://gitlab.denx.de/u-boot/u-boot/blob/master/lib/fdtdec.c#L1190 > > > If we can't run via qemu then yes, something like option #2 and > > we set DEVICE_TREE in one job and export it if set in the build job. > > It means for qemu there is no real need to build dts from source tree at > all. > Let me look at #2 for CI. OK, thanks! -- Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: