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 mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9998C433F5 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:29:00 +0000 (UTC) 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 mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A900610E7 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:29:00 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 0A900610E7 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.denx.de Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 482C880D28; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 20:28:58 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="iwETNFr4"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by phobos.denx.de (Postfix, from userid 109) id 0B40883564; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 20:28:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-ed1-x52e.google.com (mail-ed1-x52e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52e]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA8A680185 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 20:28:50 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=francois.ozog@linaro.org Received: by mail-ed1-x52e.google.com with SMTP id h7so29049102ede.8 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 11:28:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=uXFE65X91ekBpLbD0GmoGg6tqZefAXwqzWXbm9XGIJI=; b=iwETNFr4NWJPGBdGkSoGg13o/JnXt4VlWCvrjKAcHCLhp5gv8IU5BnULsqnd9SjEw0 v67A5oIHgdp1FetjfQOtkLQfDq3DivJhGmPm2S0c/eADfaPgb7qdiH3ZXLhLsWZbkMM2 1/dXVe+mMpK6P7i9Qy+a5tPBwAWnvs2920HcafgyP6E/icVQFxh2W1b87Nd+KQFMYJy8 3Yp+vZDEJ10/kY4soqzv2XyAdBGDYcBEbg0SPlRfcLrM818jVQpoHQZGAXTVDC2tXIcS nqHDRJZwVTi8wXIW3QghnWBQ8c5ntEHGyMYH6QGIQpMJTQN2DDE7ZnJUJgIoAYN2+V1k os4w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=uXFE65X91ekBpLbD0GmoGg6tqZefAXwqzWXbm9XGIJI=; b=PuO2UrqvmMT5KeKJ2wQYaIvTvtEd5D85xEb7G6nh90a4JiUbfMaKlmgdgvTB/JxHag gRKCnOV7DrJ8btdzXVns8xWutdSY89AIOxvpW7/3oDKyi8HKKvxIXW22g1QgmO1J7bES 792WXyK8alyUL77rPhnV3uN8V30M9cWruj4ggbOcPXJ2mI/acbzymeNZx3dUfr8RZ4A6 V7inYDRUvpQkQAb3SHbKumI7tYxc99xo9Y6zzLpZOXGFEB+OB5axNlyHOjQky+V09Ybw Y+qyiIbeAD3um/0/P9lAQvldEQyifeR8HGAJoYWiztwUm3ahUmI81J1NnCnn3F2qjxjl vJsw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531x360XGw38QAQ+vFGDN6XgXZCW2b8WcTmJFGOII2Tvuo/pWw6t XBdsvONiZULMaiIpLooRdbmjHRrh4aNyxfTGH8hzPw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwb8DEeGtaxQBE6F9lz15bwHJrKzb+iKwH2FPDtVU5/cqH1Tr4inCp2ulZau+3Qm+tx42E3xxS2TQEXPymbRTI= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:84a:: with SMTP id b10mr8166247edz.257.1635445730141; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 11:28:50 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211023232635.9195-1-sjg@chromium.org> <3fde4b98-e7c0-71c3-d7c4-22c6f43eae31@canonical.com> <20211028174721.GE8284@bill-the-cat> <20211028175902.GG8284@bill-the-cat> <20211028182700.GI8284@bill-the-cat> In-Reply-To: <20211028182700.GI8284@bill-the-cat> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Fran=C3=A7ois_Ozog?= Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 20:28:39 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/41] Initial implementation of standard boot To: Tom Rini Cc: Daniel Schwierzeck , Dennis Gilmore , Heinrich Schuchardt , Heinrich Schuchardt , Ilias Apalodimas , Jaehoon Chung , Lukas Auer , =?UTF-8?B?TWFyZWsgQmVow7pu?= , Marek Vasut , Masahiro Yamada , Michal Simek , Pavel Herrmann , Peng Fan , Peter Robinson , Simon Glass , Steffen Jaeckel , Stephen Warren , Stephen Warren , U-Boot Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.34 X-BeenThere: u-boot@lists.denx.de X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 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 0.103.2 at phobos.denx.de X-Virus-Status: Clean Hi Tom Le jeu. 28 oct. 2021 =C3=A0 20:27, Tom Rini a =C3=A9cr= it : > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 08:17:50PM +0200, Fran=C3=A7ois Ozog wrote: > > Hi Tom, > > > > Le jeu. 28 oct. 2021 =C3=A0 19:59, Tom Rini a =C3= =A9crit : > > > > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 06:50:02PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 6:47 PM Tom Rini wrote= : > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 06:37:42PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 3:11 PM Simon Glass > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Heinrich, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 at 05:38, Heinrich Schuchardt > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/24/21 01:25, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The bootflow feature provide a built-in way for U-Boot to > > > automatically > > > > > > > > > boot an Operating System without custom scripting and oth= er > > > customisation. > > > > > > > > > This is called 'standard boot' since it provides a standa= rd > > > way for > > > > > > > > > U-Boot to boot a distro, without scripting. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It introduces the following concepts: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - bootdev - a device which can hold a distro > > > > > > > > > - bootmeth - a method to scan a bootdev to find > bootflows > > > (owned by > > > > > > > > > U-Boot) > > > > > > > > > - bootflow - a description of how to boot (owned by t= he > > > distro) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please, describe why you are suggesting this change. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Replacing a script by a devicetree chunk is just decreasing > > > flexibility > > > > > > > > and increasing complexity. Where is the benefit? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am missing a description here of where and how a boot flo= w > > > shall be > > > > > > > > defined. Describing some device-tree binding in patch 40/41 > does > > > not > > > > > > > > replace describing the development and usage workflow. Who > will > > > provide > > > > > > > > which bootflow information when? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You still have an open discussion with Linaro about the > source of > > > > > > > > devicetrees. This discussion needs to be finalized before > > > considering > > > > > > > > this series. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In my view bootflows cannot be defined in the devicetree > because > > > prior > > > > > > > > firmware providing a devicetree is completely independent o= f > any > > > distro > > > > > > > > and therefore cannot provide a distro specific bootflow. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is actually no need to use devicetree here. I think you > might > > > > > > > have the wrong end of the stick. It is certainly possible to > add > > > nodes > > > > > > > to configure things, if needed, but it works find without any > > > changes > > > > > > > to the devicetree, as you can see from the rpi_3 patch. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are several aims with this effort: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Provide a standard way to boot anything on U-Boot, that > everyone > > > can > > > > > > > plug into (distros, board vendors, people using a custom flow= ) > > > > > > > > > > > > I as a distro maintainer don't want this, we already get the > > > "standard > > > > > > way to boot" from UEFI, this just feels like another unnecessar= y > > > > > > abstraction to that. > > > > > > > > > > Right. But part of the problem is "How do I find UEFI". Somethi= ng > > > > > somewhere needs to be configurable to say where to look, yes? > > > > > > > > Is this question from the board PoV, the developer of U-Boot or the > > > > distro trying to boot? > > > > > > > > If you mean from a boot flow PoV for UEFI to find the HW that > contains > > > > the OS to boot I thought that was handled elsewhere in the series. > > > > > > What I mean is that today looking at Pi we have: > > > #define BOOT_TARGET_DEVICES(func) \ > > > BOOT_TARGET_MMC(func) \ > > > BOOT_TARGET_USB(func) \ > > > BOOT_TARGET_PXE(func) \ > > > BOOT_TARGET_DHCP(func) > > > > > > As the board maintainer set that as the list of places to start looki= ng > > > for the next payload (say the GRUB EFI binary). Simon's series > replaces > > > that with I think he said "bootflow scan -b". And then the above env > > > portion is replaced with, well, what's documented in patch #40 if you > > > don't just want to rely on device probe order. > > > > > > Because we need to have _something_ that says where to look for what, > > > yes? > > > > Shouldn=E2=80=99t we describe the user point of view ? > > No, because to extend the x86 metaphor we're talking about the defaults > here, not what the user has configured later on. The user has and > continues to be able to configure the system afterwards, if desired. > Sorry , missed this =E2=80=9Cdetail=E2=80=9D=E2=80=A6 > > -- > Tom > --=20 Fran=C3=A7ois-Fr=C3=A9d=C3=A9ric Ozog | *Director Business Development* T: +33.67221.6485 francois.ozog@linaro.org | Skype: ffozog