[U-Boot] [PATCH v7 00/15] SiFive FU540 Support

[Kevin Hilman]

On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 1:38 PM Kevin Hilman <khilman at baylibre.com> wrote:
>
> Atish Patra <atish.patra at wdc.com> writes:
>
> > On 4/18/19 4:16 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> >> Atish Patra <atish.patra at wdc.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> On 4/18/19 12:15 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> >>>> Palmer, Anup,
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 1:55 AM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer at sifive.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 07:33:25 PDT (-0700), bmeng.cn at gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 7:58 AM Kevin Hilman <khilman at baylibre.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Kevin Hilman <khilman at baylibre.com> writes:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi Anup,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Anup Patel <Anup.Patel at wdc.com> writes:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> This patchset adds SiFive Freedom Unleashed (FU540) support
> >>>>>>>>> to RISC-V U-Boot.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The patches are based upon latest U-Boot source tree
> >>>>>>>>> (git://git.denx.de/u-boot.git) at commit id
> >>>>>>>>> dbe70c7d4e3d5c705a98d82952e05a591efd0683
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> All drivers namely: SiFive PRCI, SiFive Serial, and Cadance
> >>>>>>>>> MACB Ethernet work fine on actual SiFive Unleashed board and
> >>>>>>>>> QEMU sifive_u machine.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I tested u-boot networking (DHCP, TFTP) on my desk with a gigE switch
> >>>>>>>> and it worked fine.  Then, I moved it to a lab with a 100Mb switch,
> >>>>>>>> and DHCP doesn't work anymore.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> And to be clear, neither does TFTP if setting static
> >>>>>>> ipaddr/netmask/gatewayip etc.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Sound to me a bug of the GEM driver on SiFive FU540 board.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It looks to me like u-boot is missing a driver for the GEM clockmux in the
> >>>>> FU540.  This is necessary to switch between the clock for 1G operation and 100M
> >>>>> operation.  Without this you'll just get whatever clock was set up by the
> >>>>> previous boot stage (or even worse, reset).
> >>>>
> >>>> Anyone know if this is fixed in u-boot yet?  I've yet to try the
> >>>> latest mainline u-boot, but will if if it's expected to work.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I have not seen a GEM driver for FU540 board. So I guess it is not fixed
> >>> it. Is it a blocker for setting up kernelCI for RISC-V ?
> >>
> >> Not really, that's only one of the remaining issue. For now, I have
> >> connected it to a gigE switch, so u-boot networking is working.
> >>
> >> But, the bigger blocker for kernelCI right now is not having
> >> out-of-the-box mainline support.  Mainline is still missing a serial
> >> driver, and a handful of Kconfig options in the default defconfig to
> >> make things boot[1].
> >>
> >> If I use the 'v5.1-rc4_unleashed' from your github, along with my
> >> kconfig fragment[1], things are working well.
> >>
> >> But in order to automate this for kernelCI, we need all of that
> >> upstream.
> >>
> > Yeah. I agree. We need upstream drivers sooner than later.
> > I believe SiFive Team (Paul & co) are working on this.
> >
> > He recently sent updated version of driver patches to the linux-riscv
> > mailing list.
>
> Yes, I'm trying to test all of those (hence our other discussion on the
> DT thread)
>
> >> [1] This is the config fragment I'm adding to the default defconfig in
> >> mainline.  I'm not exactly sure which ones are absolutely need for basic
> >> boot.
> >>
> >> CONFIG_SERIAL_SIFIVE=y
> >> CONFIG_SERIAL_SIFIVE_CONSOLE=y
> >> CONFIG_SIFIVE_PLIC=y
> >> CONFIG_SPI=y
> >> CONFIG_SPI_SIFIVE=y
> >> CONFIG_GPIOLIB=y
> >> CONFIG_GPIO_SIFIVE=y
> >> CONFIG_PWM_SIFIVE=y
> >> CONFIG_CLK_U54_PRCI=y
> >> CONFIG_CLK_GEMGXL_MGMT=y
> >>
> >
> > My working config has enabled all of the above except CONFIG_PWM_SIFIVE.
> > I have not played around the config that much to find out absolute
> > minimum config. So this may not be the answer you are looking for :).
>
> At least for kernelCI, we'll need to figure that out and get it upstream
> if we want to boot test these.

Oh, and one other u-boot question.

Any reason you didn't enable `booti` support in riscv u-boot?  That
would allow you to boot the Image (or Image.gz) directly, instead of
the need to create a special image with u-boot header (uImage)

Kevin