[U-Boot] pull request: raspberry pi updates

[Matthias Brugger]

On 24/06/2019 20:11, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 04:25:33PM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 10:21:22PM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
>>> On 6/12/19 10:08 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 10:07:31PM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
>>>>> On 6/12/19 9:56 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 03:48:06PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Matthias,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have these been out on the list for general review? I don't remember
>>>>>>> seeing them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 1:57 PM Matthias Brugger <mbrugger at suse.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Tom,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please have a look on the following patches.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>> The following changes since commit fc6c0e29a28f6b71dfb728b7f78e9e770f2cd218:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   Prepare v2019.07-rc4 (2019-06-10 21:27:46 -0400)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> are available in the Git repository at:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   https://github.com/mbgg/u-boot.git tags/rpi-next-2019.07
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> for you to fetch changes up to 38e58ff2b785b45e8c8ade8e23f916a1984016c6:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   ARM: bcm283x: Fix definition of MBOX_TAG_TEST_PIXEL_ORDER (2019-06-12 12:23:46
>>>>>>>> +0200)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> - fix complation error for CONFIG_USB
>>>>>>>> - update RPi3 DTBs to v5.1-rc6 state
>>>>>>>> - add defconfig for RPi3 B+
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why do we need a separate config when it's detected and works
>>>>>>> perfectly well with the standard rpi_3 and rpi_3_32b configs?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Good question.  It came from Heinrich, so Heinrich?
>>>>>
>>>>> If we call the bootefi command without a OS supplied device tree the
>>>>> U-Boot device tree is passed to the operating system.
>>>>>
>>>>> So we need a device tree which is a complete description of the
>>>>> respective system.
>>>>>
>>>>> On the Linaro boot-architecture list there has been a lengthy discussion
>>>>> with Linaro people thinking that it is the responsibility of the
>>>>> hardware and firmware to provide the correct device tree and not of the OS.
>>>>
>>>> OK, but on Pi aren't we passed, and pass along, the dtb from the
>>>> previous stage?
>>>>
>>> Currently `bootefi` uses as default what it finds in $fdt_control_addr
>>> and provides this to GRUB, Linux, or any other payload.
>>
>> Right, and maybe I'm mistaken, but doesn't the previous stage on Pi pass
>> in a device tree, that U-Boot then uses?
> 
> I haven't taken this as I haven't gotten an answer to this part.  I
> could have sworn that the proprietary loader passed along the device
> tree that's passed by us to the next stage.
> 

Tom, sorry for my late answer. I was looking into this. I'll put it on top of my
list for today. I think you are right, but I want to first understand 100% the
implications of CONFIG_OF_EMBED.

Regards,
Matthias

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20190625/065cecb5/attachment.sig>