[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 11/11] riscv: Add SiFive FU540 board support

[Alexander Graf]

On 24.01.19 12:05, Anup Patel wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 4:16 PM Alexander Graf <agraf at suse.de> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 24.01.19 11:43, Anup Patel wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Andreas Schwab [mailto:schwab at suse.de]
>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2019 3:24 PM
>>>> To: Atish Patra <Atish.Patra at wdc.com>
>>>> Cc: Anup Patel <anup at brainfault.org>; Anup Patel <Anup.Patel at wdc.com>;
>>>> Joe Hershberger <joe.hershberger at ni.com>; U-Boot Mailing List <u-
>>>> boot at lists.denx.de>; Palmer Dabbelt <palmer at sifive.com>; Alexander Graf
>>>> <agraf at suse.de>; Christoph Hellwig <hch at infradead.org>; Paul Walmsley
>>>> <paul.walmsley at sifive.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 11/11] riscv: Add SiFive FU540 board support
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 23 2019, Atish Patra <atish.patra at wdc.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> or you can try to edit the DT directly and update the FSBL if you are
>>>>> comfortable with it.
>>>>
>>>> I think it would make sense to add the node in the board init function.
>>>> That way it would work whether or not the FSBL is updated.
>>>
>>> Best way is to either fix in DTS itself or BBL/OpenSBI.
>>>
>>> For BBL it is difficult due to lack of matured FDT manipulation APIs.
>>> My bad for previous misinformation about BBL. I thought Atish had
>>> hacked this in BBL but he had hacked U-Boot.
>>>
>>> We already have taken care of this in OpenSBI using LibFDT so with
>>> OpenSBI no hacks would be required.
>>>
>>> We are just few days away from OpenSBI being made public so no point
>>> of adding work-around for "stdout-path" in U-Boot as well.
>>
>> I disagree. We want people to easily use this code, and not use it as a
>> means to push for the OpenSBI vs BBL discussion.
>>
>> So IMHO a quirk that adds the stdout-path property in an early board
>> init function is the best way to move forward here. That way the "good"
>> case keeps behaving the same, but we stay compatible to current,
>> existing previous stage firmware.
>>
>> Please, don't *ever* consider DT something that you "just modify". If
>> anything worked with a DT before, you are required to keep it that way.
>> Otherwise you break the compatibility contract between your firmware layers.
> 
> No issues, I will try to add it board_init().

Board_init() is too late. This needs to go into early_board_init_f().
IIUC Andreas is prototyping that approach right now.


Alex