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

[Anup Patel]

On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 4:48 PM Alexander Graf <agraf at suse.de> wrote:
>
>
>
> 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.

Thanks Alex and Andreas.

My latest patches are in riscv_sifive_fu540_v4 branch of
https://github.com/avpatel/u-boot

I can include Andreas's patch in my v5. If he is fine with it.

Regards,
Anup

>
>
> Alex