[U-Boot] [RESEND PATCH v7 00/11] rockchip: Add new rk3399 boards

[Paul Kocialkowski]

On Thu, 2019-05-09 at 18:06 +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
> On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 6:01 PM Paul Kocialkowski
> <paul.kocialkowski at bootlin.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Thu, 2019-05-09 at 16:15 +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
> > > Hi Paul,
> > > 
> > > On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 12:38 PM Paul Kocialkowski
> > > <paul.kocialkowski at bootlin.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > On Wed, 2019-05-08 at 11:11 +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
> > > > > (Sorry for the noice, I have missed to send two patches from v7)
> > > > > 
> > > > > This is v7 resend patchset for New rk3399 boards support wrt previous
> > > > > version[1]
> > > > > 
> > > > > Unfortunately initial version of creating rk3399-u-boot.dtsi and
> > > > > orangepi rk3399 changes are merged, so this is rework on top of
> > > > > u-boot-rockchip/master.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Overall this series add support below rk3399 boards
> > > > > - NanoPI M4
> > > > > - NanoPC T4
> > > > > - NanoPI NEO4
> > > > > - Orangepi RK3399
> > > > > - Rock PI 4
> > > > > - Rockpro64
> > > > > 
> > > > > All the respective dts(i) files are synced from Linux 5.1-rc2 and few
> > > > > dts(i) from linux-next.
> > > > > 
> > > > > SoC u-boot specific dtsi rk3399-u-boot.dtsi changes are part of another
> > > > > series [3].
> > > > > 
> > > > > Out of all above boards Rockpor64, Rock-PI and Nanopi NEO4 would support
> > > > > booting via Rockchip miniloader as of now.
> > > > 
> > > > Could you send these two boards in a separate series so that we avoid
> > > > merging them for now (because SPL support is broken) and then re-
> > > > iterate the series later with the DDR bringup? Or maybe find a way to
> > > > disable SPL support, but in any case, it's not ok to merge a board with
> > > > SPL enabled and broken.
> > > 
> > > I have explained the details about this concern on v2 [1], thought you
> > > would comeback on the same line instead here.
> > 
> > Yes, you have already explained the issue, but I don't think it's
> > enough a justification to merge broken SPL support. If it was only
> > partial or limited, it would be fine, but here it's just broken.
> > 
> > > Anyway, making SPL as an optional is not an idea to go with Mainline
> > > as we make many decisions with regards to make SPL is mandatory.
> > 
> > Yes I think making SPL mandatory is a good idea, so that's why I'm
> > suggesting that we don't merge the boards until they have SPL support.
> > 
> > > Since the DDR is show stopper here (and it would really need a good
> > > amount of time, since it effect the other boards), I can go with TPL
> > > enabled boot-chain where ddr bin, SPL and U-Boot proper can be part of
> > > booting stages. This way we can avoid skipping SPL usage, and many
> > > config changes to make SPL optional.
> > 
> > Honestly I don't really see the point of merging these boards at all if
> > they don't have SPL support. People who really want to use them with
> > the rockchip blob can cherry-pick the patches from the list in the
> > meantime.
> > 
> > It also creates incentive for people to free the DDR init, since that
> > becomes a condition to have the board upstream.
> > 
> > What do you think?
> 
> I don't know whether you get my point or not? these boards are not
> merged yet. What I'm saying is we are going to support them with
> TPL-enabled, that was SPL can make use of these boards which still a
> valid boot-chain. moreover this way can avoid touching core files and
> no specific change require while supporting ddr dtsi.

Ah maybe I missed the point indeed.

So what you are suggesting is:
rkboot (acts as TPL) -> SPL -> U-Boot?

Then I have no problem what that.

Cheers,

Paul

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com