[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/5] Makefile: also build fdt for snapdragon

[Rob Clark]

On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 03:10:10PM -0400, Rob Clark wrote:
>
>> Snapdragon is a bit of a funny case, where we want to build the fdt to
>> pass to lk, which loads us, but otherwise want to treat it as OF_BOARD,
>> since lk will patch the fdt (for example, to insert simple-framebuffer
>> node).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark at gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  Makefile | 6 ++++++
>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
>> index 452596485d..0749cdfc5d 100644
>> --- a/Makefile
>> +++ b/Makefile
>> @@ -780,6 +780,12 @@ ALL-$(CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK) += u-boot.img
>>  endif
>>  ALL-$(CONFIG_TPL) += tpl/u-boot-tpl.bin
>>  ALL-$(CONFIG_OF_SEPARATE) += u-boot.dtb
>> +# Snapdragon devices, where lk/aboot loads u-boot is kind of a special
>> +# case, because lk loads the fdt which is embedded (along with u-boot)
>> +# in a boot.img.  But it also does some fdt fixups.  So generally we
>> +# want to treat it like CONFIG_OF_BOARD=y, except that we also want
>> +# to build the dtb's
>> +ALL-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SNAPDRAGON) += u-boot.dtb
>>  ifeq ($(CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK),y)
>>  ALL-$(CONFIG_OF_SEPARATE) += u-boot-dtb.img
>>  endif
>
> We really can't just select OF_SEPARATE here?  Because the code in
> lib/fdtdec.c is wrong, as it stands, yes?  If so, could we shuffle that
> code right to allow for the case of "we get our DT modified by firmware
> that loads us" ? That doesn't soune like a super uncommon case moving
> forward.

from a quick look, I think the only reason we need OF_BOARD is the
call to board_fdt_blob_setup() in fdtdec..

I guess we could make that a weak sym, and call it unconditionally..
in that case I think OF_SEPARATE would work.  If you think that is a
cleaner solution, I can give that a try.

BR,
-R