[PATCH v4 20/27] Makefile: Warn against using CONFIG_SPL_FIT_GENERATOR
michal.simek at xilinx.com
Mon Aug 17 08:49:17 CEST 2020
On 16. 08. 20 5:39, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Michal,
> On Fri, 14 Aug 2020 at 07:28, Michal Simek <monstr at monstr.eu> wrote:
>> Hi Simon,
>> ne 19. 7. 2020 v 22:06 odesílatel Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> napsal:
>>> This option is used to run arch-specific shell scripts which produce .its
>>> files which are used to produce FIT images. We already have binman which
>>> is designed to produce firmware images. It is more powerful and has tests.
>>> So this option should be deprecated and not used. Existing uses should be
>>> Mentions of this in code reviews over the last year or so do not seem to
>>> have resulted in action, and things are getting worse.
>>> So let's add a warning.
>>> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
>>> Reviewed-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com>
>>> (no changes since v1)
>>> Makefile | 9 +++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
>>> index f1b5be1882..d73c10a973 100644
>>> --- a/Makefile
>>> +++ b/Makefile
>>> @@ -1148,6 +1148,13 @@ ifneq ($(CONFIG_DM_ETH),y)
>>> @echo >&2 "See doc/driver-model/migration.rst for more info."
>>> @echo >&2 "===================================================="
>>> +ifneq ($(CONFIG_SPL_FIT_GENERATOR),)
>>> + @echo >&2 "===================== WARNING ======================"
>>> + @echo >&2 "This board uses CONFIG_SPL_FIT_GENERATOR. Please migrate"
>>> + @echo >&2 "to binman instead, to avoid the proliferation of"
>>> + @echo >&2 "arch-specific scripts with no tests."
>>> + @echo >&2 "===================================================="
>>> @# Check that this build does not use CONFIG options that we do not
>>> @# know about unless they are in Kconfig. All the existing CONFIG
>>> @@ -1345,6 +1352,8 @@ endif
>>> # Boards with more complex image requirements can provide an .its source file
>>> # or a generator script
>>> +# NOTE: Please do not use this. We are migrating away from Makefile rules to use
>>> +# binman instead.
>>> ifneq ($(CONFIG_SPL_FIT_SOURCE),"")
>>> U_BOOT_ITS := u-boot.its
>>> $(U_BOOT_ITS): $(subst ",,$(CONFIG_SPL_FIT_SOURCE))
>> I just got to this conversion and I am curious how that transition
>> should look like.
>> I found how FIT image is created which is fine but I didn't find any
>> reference on how to generate images based on CONFIG_OF_LIST.
>> If you look at arch/arm/mach-zynqmp/mkimage_fit_atf.sh you will see
>> that I loop over this entry and create multiple DT nodes and the same
>> amount of configurations to cover it. Is this supported by binman?
>> If yes, what's the syntax for it?
> The easiest way is probably to create a new entry type, like zynq-fit.
> Then you can generate the DT using the sequence writer functions. See
> _ReadSubNodes() in fit.py for an example.
> You can perhaps have a template subnode and use that in a for loop to
> generate the nodes.
>> I tried several configurations and we can use that for generating qspi
>> images and also images with different configurations to have them
>> but first I need to be able to handle the case above.
> I was thinking of converting sunxi which has the same need, but it
> sounds like you are on the case. Let me know if you need help.
Nope. I just saw that message and started to play with it to find out
what needs to be done and how this fits to bigger picture. If this
doesn't work directly then the work needs to be planned which will take
time especially when this utility is new for us and we could have issues
with writing code in python. Would be good if you can do the first shot
because you know this utility and I am more than happy to test it, try
and adopt if needed for our case.
Sunxi is very similar case as is zynqmp. Difference is they hardcode
default configuration to config_1. ZynqMP is setting up default based on
default DT configured at that time.
In connection to binman I see that there would be a need to generate
images with ATF and without ATF in configuration node and with different
default configuration. There could be also a need to add additional
loadable entry such as bitstreams.
Back to zynq-fit new entry type. I don't think it should be zynq/zynqmp
type because as was state in commit message u-boot.itb generation is
very similar for all these boards that's why name for this new entry
should be generic.
More information about the U-Boot