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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1DE1C433E0 for ; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 13:17:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD2E364F2C for ; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 13:17:55 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org BD2E364F2C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.vnet.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Dqd3P5gvZz3cZb for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 00:17:53 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=at8NtKH1; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=linux.vnet.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.158.5; helo=mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=klaus@linux.vnet.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=at8NtKH1; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Dqd2y72m4z30Hn for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 00:17:29 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098417.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 122D7uLf068094; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 08:17:17 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=subject : from : to : references : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=Z9BGWqFMpG/vlmeo/s/jAvbsolE1gCpbARzRpGD1bIA=; b=at8NtKH1gfKzhvEHW7ypJERXCsDIY5KSvQ8ZSOdc9+KQxjU/1qZYA2roP1DU4+ZPCxTT DQ0Hp+jf8OyFYj+ccdJxwcXEGD2CgE7zA7cACIEB0V4PbJTgn3SwXycPxrr+T81lxH5g vmUYoRCseClUn94Sd95nVH8sjsw4iYzyJEJVhuUs04t2tzp1QJYdrgN2gUUY0QHA0lw0 5fajFerDJc4SBBzwYFK7pPVl7LtCjwj1RXRdEnYgsiEQJyLMXhisK5ioEE9CE48IVukC JAzXycJfmZttAqYMmKvMWV/HY+4OHye4KBfk4Yvy6cPUq41bDK30tZcaRoLdZh0aV58s aA== Received: from ppma04dal.us.ibm.com (7a.29.35a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.53.41.122]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 371mauvbs2-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 02 Mar 2021 08:17:17 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04dal.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04dal.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 122DCNGj012476; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 13:17:16 GMT Received: from b01cxnp22033.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp22033.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.23]) by ppma04dal.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 36ydq950p9-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 02 Mar 2021 13:17:16 +0000 Received: from b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.111]) by b01cxnp22033.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 122DHGmL32440688 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 2 Mar 2021 13:17:16 GMT Received: from b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01805AC05F; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 13:17:16 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27880AC05B; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 13:17:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.85.166.234] (unknown [9.85.166.234]) by b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 13:17:14 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: (Aspeed2600) Booting with a SPL loading U-boot fitImage From: Klaus Heinrich Kiwi To: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org, Joel Stanley , Andrew Jeffery , Ryan Chen References: Message-ID: <30ad3445-7d0d-cea7-479e-162b6dc90ed3@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2021 10:17:14 -0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.369, 18.0.761 definitions=2021-03-02_06:2021-03-01, 2021-03-02 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxlogscore=999 impostorscore=0 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2103020107 X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "openbmc" On 3/1/2021 4:25 PM, Klaus Heinrich Kiwi wrote: > Has anyone been able to successfully bring-up U-boot proper as a fitImage from the SPL, when using U-boot from the 2019.4 Aspeed SDK? I spent a bit more time reading through the Aspeed SDK U-boot code and I think this is simply not implemented, and actually might explain why a Legacy Uboot image loads, even if Legacy Image is not enabled in the config... So arch/arm/mach-aspeed/ast2600/utils.S defines the ast2600 ast_bootmode() to be one of 'AST_BOOTMODE_UART', 'AST_BOOTMODE_SPI' or 'AST_BOOTMODE_EMMC' based on hw strapping info and arch/arm/mach-aspeed/ast2600/spl.c:spl_boot_device() uses that to instruct the SPL which (of these 3 methods) to use... The SPL is being built with multiple (redundant?) image loaders: 0000e5d0 D _u_boot_list_2_spl_image_loader_2_aspeed_spl_mmc_load_image0ASPEED_BOOT_DEVICE_MMC 0000e5dc D _u_boot_list_2_spl_image_loader_2_aspeed_spl_ram_load_image0ASPEED_BOOT_DEVICE_RAM 0000e5e8 D _u_boot_list_2_spl_image_loader_2_aspeed_spl_ymodem_load_image0ASPEED_BOOT_DEVICE_UART 0000e5f4 D _u_boot_list_2_spl_image_loader_2_spl_mmc_load_image0BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1 0000e600 D _u_boot_list_2_spl_image_loader_2_spl_mmc_load_image0BOOT_DEVICE_MMC2 0000e60c D _u_boot_list_2_spl_image_loader_2_spl_mmc_load_image0BOOT_DEVICE_MMC2_2 0000e618 D _u_boot_list_2_spl_image_loader_2_spl_ram_load_image0BOOT_DEVICE_RAM 0000e624 D _u_boot_list_2_spl_image_loader_2_spl_ymodem_load_image0BOOT_DEVICE_UART But the ast_bootmode() causes only the aspeed_spl_*_load_image() to be really used. And if we compare the aspeed versions (from arch/arm/mach-aspeed/ast2600/spl_boot.c) with the common versions (common/spl/spl_mmc.c), we clearly see that the common version has the infrastructure to detect and load the FIT, while the aspeed version is simply loading the raw contents of the mmc into RAM and setting the entry point to it's start (that means: treating the mmc contents as a legacy u-boot image regardless). I guess that the amount of coding required to catch-up 'aspeed_secboot_spl_*_load_image' with the necessary SPL_LOAD_FIT infrastructure is not trivial, so I'm hoping that the other way around (using the common infrastructure) is easier - Joel, Ryan, any comments? It would also help in avoiding redundant symbols, since the way it is we cannot fit everything we need in the SPL + SPL DTB in 64KB anyway... -Klaus -- Klaus Heinrich Kiwi