From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jonas Gorski Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] dt-bindings: mtd: describe BCM963XX ImageTag format and usage Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 11:02:40 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20180828111944.5956-1-jonas.gorski@gmail.com> <20180828111944.5956-5-jonas.gorski@gmail.com> <5b8e8a58.1c69fb81.12eaa.f292@mx.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5b8e8a58.1c69fb81.12eaa.f292@mx.google.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-mtd" Errors-To: linux-mtd-bounces+gldm-linux-mtd-36=gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Rob Herring Cc: Mark Rutland , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Florian Fainelli , Boris Brezillon , Richard Weinberger , Marek Vasut , MTD Maling List , Brian Norris , David Woodhouse List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 4 September 2018 at 02:30, Rob Herring wrote: > On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 01:19:43PM +0200, Jonas Gorski wrote: >> Describe how to use the BCM963XX ImageTag format in a mixed flash layout >> environment. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jonas Gorski >> --- >> .../mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt | 78 ++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 78 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt >> new file mode 100644 >> index 000000000000..f4a444d69d9a >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt >> @@ -0,0 +1,78 @@ >> +Broadcom BCM963XX ImageTag Partition Container >> +============================================== >> + >> +Some Broadcom BCM63XX SoC based devices contain additional, non discoverable >> +partitions or non standard bootloader partition sizes. For these a mixed layout >> +needs to be used with an explicit firmware partition. >> + >> +The BCM963XX ImageTag is a simple firmware header describing the offsets and >> +sizes of the rootfs and kernel parts contained in the firmware. >> + >> +Required properties: >> +- compatible : must be "brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag" >> + >> +Examples: >> + >> +flash@1e000000 { >> + compatible = "cfi-flash"; >> + reg = <0x1e000000 0x2000000>; >> + bank-width = <2>; >> + >> + partitions { >> + compatible = "fixed-partitions"; >> + #address-cells = <1>; >> + #size-cells = <1>; >> + >> + cfe@0 { >> + reg = <0x0 0x10000>; >> + read-only; >> + }; >> + >> + firmware@10000 { >> + reg = <0x10000 0x7d0000>; >> + compatible = "brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag"; >> + }; >> + >> + caldata@7e0000 { >> + reg = <0x7e0000 0x10000>; >> + read-only; >> + }; >> + >> + nvram@7f0000 { >> + reg = <0x7f0000 0x10000>; >> + }; >> + }; >> +}; >> + >> + >> +flash@1e000000 { >> + compatible = "cfi-flash"; >> + reg = <0x1e000000 0x2000000>; >> + bank-width = <2>; >> + >> + partitions { >> + compatible = "fixed-partitions"; >> + #address-cells = <1>; >> + #size-cells = <1>; >> + >> + /* >> + * Some devices use a flash chip with 64k erase blocks, some >> + * use one with 128k erase blocks, so the vendor decided to >> + * always use 128k as the firmware offset. >> + */ > > That's a interesting piece of info, but not really a reason to have a > second example. Generally, I'd rather have one example too many than one too few, but I can drop it if you think it's unnecessary. If I do that, can I add your Ack then here as well for the v2? > >> + >> + cfe@0 { >> + reg = <0x0 0x20000>; >> + read-only; >> + }; >> + >> + firmware@20000 { >> + reg = <0x20000 0x7c0000>; >> + compatible = "brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag"; >> + }; >> + >> + nvram@7e0000 { >> + reg = <0x7e0000 0x20000>; >> + }; >> + }; >> +}; >> -- >> 2.13.2 >> > ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/ From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wr1-x444.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::444]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1fzI6D-0003e2-K0 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 09:03:15 +0000 Received: by mail-wr1-x444.google.com with SMTP id v90-v6so21078555wrc.0 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 02:03:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5b8e8a58.1c69fb81.12eaa.f292@mx.google.com> References: <20180828111944.5956-1-jonas.gorski@gmail.com> <20180828111944.5956-5-jonas.gorski@gmail.com> <5b8e8a58.1c69fb81.12eaa.f292@mx.google.com> From: Jonas Gorski Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 11:02:40 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] dt-bindings: mtd: describe BCM963XX ImageTag format and usage To: Rob Herring Cc: MTD Maling List , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, David Woodhouse , Brian Norris , Boris Brezillon , Marek Vasut , Richard Weinberger , Mark Rutland , Florian Fainelli Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 4 September 2018 at 02:30, Rob Herring wrote: > On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 01:19:43PM +0200, Jonas Gorski wrote: >> Describe how to use the BCM963XX ImageTag format in a mixed flash layout >> environment. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jonas Gorski >> --- >> .../mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt | 78 ++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 78 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt >> new file mode 100644 >> index 000000000000..f4a444d69d9a >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt >> @@ -0,0 +1,78 @@ >> +Broadcom BCM963XX ImageTag Partition Container >> +============================================== >> + >> +Some Broadcom BCM63XX SoC based devices contain additional, non discoverable >> +partitions or non standard bootloader partition sizes. For these a mixed layout >> +needs to be used with an explicit firmware partition. >> + >> +The BCM963XX ImageTag is a simple firmware header describing the offsets and >> +sizes of the rootfs and kernel parts contained in the firmware. >> + >> +Required properties: >> +- compatible : must be "brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag" >> + >> +Examples: >> + >> +flash@1e000000 { >> + compatible = "cfi-flash"; >> + reg = <0x1e000000 0x2000000>; >> + bank-width = <2>; >> + >> + partitions { >> + compatible = "fixed-partitions"; >> + #address-cells = <1>; >> + #size-cells = <1>; >> + >> + cfe@0 { >> + reg = <0x0 0x10000>; >> + read-only; >> + }; >> + >> + firmware@10000 { >> + reg = <0x10000 0x7d0000>; >> + compatible = "brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag"; >> + }; >> + >> + caldata@7e0000 { >> + reg = <0x7e0000 0x10000>; >> + read-only; >> + }; >> + >> + nvram@7f0000 { >> + reg = <0x7f0000 0x10000>; >> + }; >> + }; >> +}; >> + >> + >> +flash@1e000000 { >> + compatible = "cfi-flash"; >> + reg = <0x1e000000 0x2000000>; >> + bank-width = <2>; >> + >> + partitions { >> + compatible = "fixed-partitions"; >> + #address-cells = <1>; >> + #size-cells = <1>; >> + >> + /* >> + * Some devices use a flash chip with 64k erase blocks, some >> + * use one with 128k erase blocks, so the vendor decided to >> + * always use 128k as the firmware offset. >> + */ > > That's a interesting piece of info, but not really a reason to have a > second example. Generally, I'd rather have one example too many than one too few, but I can drop it if you think it's unnecessary. If I do that, can I add your Ack then here as well for the v2? > >> + >> + cfe@0 { >> + reg = <0x0 0x20000>; >> + read-only; >> + }; >> + >> + firmware@20000 { >> + reg = <0x20000 0x7c0000>; >> + compatible = "brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag"; >> + }; >> + >> + nvram@7e0000 { >> + reg = <0x7e0000 0x20000>; >> + }; >> + }; >> +}; >> -- >> 2.13.2 >> >