[U-Boot] [PATCH v2] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add support for Khadas Edge/Edge-V/Captain boards
kever.yang at rock-chips.com
Tue Jun 18 10:08:58 UTC 2019
On 06/18/2019 05:03 PM, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-06-18 at 14:27 +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 1:55 PM Paul Kocialkowski
>> <paul.kocialkowski at bootlin.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2019-06-17 at 15:24 +0800, xieqinick at gmail.com wrote:
>>>> From: Nick Xie <nick at khadas.com>
>>> Was this tested with SPL support? I don't see DRAM configuration here
>>> so it seems that it relies on the non-free rockchip loader.
>>> If that is the case, could you please indicate that in the commit
>>> To maintainers: please do not merge this series before DRAM init and
>>> SPL support is available for these boards.
>>> It seems that other RK3399 boards were merged without SPL support and
>>> sofar, I have the feeling that nobody cared to explain how we got into
>>> this broken situation. Please don't merge any more such board.
>> fyi: no rk3399 boards were merged w/o SPL. lpddr4 boards were merged
>> with TPL-enabled (which was discussed on the threads, if you remember)
>> with below boot chain.
>> rkbin (TPL) -> SPL -> U-Boot proper
>> Same case for this board as well.
> Here is a quote from Philipp Tomsich on the thread we discussed this:
> " On some boards, there will be no TPL and only a SPL stage that will
> initialise DRAM (as the move to having TPL on the RK3399 is optional).
> I agree with Paul that the DRAM init should be part of U-Boot whenever
> we add new boards and make an open DRAM init a prerequisite. "
> So even if I frequently confuse SPL and TPL, it doesn't change the fact
> that no board should be merged without proper DRAM init.
> Please stop pushing for merging these boards. I'm not sure what we
> should do about the boards that were merged already without DRAM init,
> but maybe they should be reverted.
I don't think we have to have full DRAM init source code for each
board before we can merge it, I believe most of the board on U-Boot
mainline need to removed due to this rule. There are so many boards
from different vendor need a binary loader before U-Boot, and I can
see only very few drivers for dram at driver/ram/, and I believe rockchip
is already the most open vendor on this area.
I won't use this rule to stop developers contribute there source code,
for a board support, we only need the board to have the full documentation
about how to setup and boot with upstream U-Boot. and I think the
most of people cares more about features in U-Boot proper. Everything
before U-Boot proper, you can use TPL/SPL or alternative to use binary
from vendor, as you can see all over the U-Boot mainline now, although
we encourage people to use full open source TPL/SPL.
Specifically for U-Boot Rockchip platform, I would like people to
support not only U-Boot
proper, but also for full SPL(ATF, OP-TEE support, itb image and other
support. And for DRAM init,
- if this belongs to SPL for this board, you must implement it or else
SPL won't work;
- if this does not belong to SPL for this board, you need implement full
and you can either to have full function TPL with DRAM init(which is
or alternatively use binary loader from vendor.
I'm not sure if you have write a new dram driver for a board, but I know
even the board vendor may not have the capability to write the DRAM
driver, so this should not stop developers contribute to all other 99%
features on U-Boot.
More information about the U-Boot