[PATCH v2 4/5] imx: imx6ul: Add support for Kontron Electronics SL/BL i.MX6UL/ULL boards (N63xx/N64xx)

[Stefano Babic]

Hi Frieder,

On 19.07.21 13:57, Frieder Schrempf wrote:
> Hi Stefano,
> 
> On 17.07.21 14:08, Stefano Babic wrote:
>> Hi Frieder,
>>
>> On 13.07.21 11:14, Frieder Schrempf wrote:
>>> From: Frieder Schrempf <frieder.schrempf at kontron.de>
>>>
>>> This adds support for i.MX6UL/ULL-based evaluation kits with SoMs by
>>> Kontron Electronics GmbH.
>>>
>>> Currently there are the following SoM flavors (SoM-Line):
>>>     * N6310: SOM with i.MX6UL-2, 256MB RAM, 256MB SPI NAND
>>>     * N6311: SOM with i.MX6UL-2, 512MB RAM, 512MB SPI NAND
>>>     * N6411: SOM with i.MX6ULL, 512MB RAM, 512MB SPI NAND
>>>
>>> And the according evaluation boards (Board-Line):
>>>     * N6310-S: Baseboard with SOM N6310, eMMC, display (optional), ...
>>>     * N6311-S: Baseboard with SOM N6311, eMMC, display (optional), ...
>>>     * N6411-S: Baseboard with SOM N6411, eMMC, display (optional), ...
>>>
>>> Currently U-Boot describes i.MX6UL and i.MX6ULL through separate config
>>> options at compile-time. Though the differences are so minor, that for
>>> the scope of these SoMs we just use a single defconfig that is compatible
>>> with both SoCs.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Frieder Schrempf <frieder.schrempf at kontron.de>
>>> Reviewed-by: Stefano Babic <sbabic at denx.de>
>>> ---
>>> Fixes in v2:
>>>     * Add MAINTAINERS file
>>>     * Rename board directory
>>>     * Use binman to generate FIT
>>
>> Something weird happens here. kontron_mx6ul is built well, however this breaks the rest of i.MX6UL boards. The point is when another board is built, but your DT is built as well due to:
>>
>> +       imx6ul-pico-pi.dtb \
>> +       imx6ul-kontron-n631x-s.dtb \
>> +       imx6ull-kontron-n641x-s.dtb
>>
>>
>> In fact, I get :
>>
>> Building current source for 5 boards (32 threads, 7 jobs per thread)
>>         arm:  +   mx6ul_14x14_evk
>> +(mx6ul_14x14_evk) Error: arch/arm/dts/imx6ul-kontron-n6x1x-s-u-boot.dtsi:57.27-28 syntax error
>> +(mx6ul_14x14_evk) FATAL ERROR: Unable to parse input tree
>> +(mx6ul_14x14_evk) make[3]: *** [scripts/Makefile.lib:332: arch/arm/dts/imx6ul-kontron-n631x-s.dtb] Error 1
>> +(mx6ul_14x14_evk) make[3]: *** [scripts/Makefile.lib:332: arch/arm/dts/imx6ull-kontron-n641x-s.dtb] Error 1
>> +(mx6ul_14x14_evk) make[2]: *** [dts/Makefile:44: arch-dtbs] Error 2
>> +(mx6ul_14x14_evk) make[1]: *** [Makefile:1141: dts/dt.dtb] Error 2
>> +(mx6ul_14x14_evk) make: *** [Makefile:171: sub-make] Error 2
>>         arm:  +   mx6ul_9x9_evk
>> +(mx6ul_9x9_evk) Error: arch/arm/dts/imx6ul-kontron-n6x1x-s-u-boot.dtsi:57.27-28 syntax error
>> +(mx6ul_9x9_evk) FATAL ERROR: Unable to parse input tree
>> +(mx6ul_9x9_evk) make[3]: *** [scripts/Makefile.lib:332: arch/arm/dts/imx6ul-kontron-n631x-s.dtb] Error 1
>> +(mx6ul_9x9_evk) make[3]: *** [scripts/Makefile.lib:332: arch/arm/dts/imx6ull-kontron-n641x-s.dtb] Error 1
>> +(mx6ul_9x9_evk) make[2]: *** [dts/Makefile:44: arch-dtbs] Error 2
>> +(mx6ul_9x9_evk) make[1]: *** [Makefile:1141: dts/dt.dtb] Error 2
>> +(mx6ul_9x9_evk) make: *** [Makefile:171: sub-make] Error 2
>>      3    0    2 /5              0:00:05  : mx6ul_9x9_evk
>>
>> And same errors with other MX6UL boards. Just to check this, I hacked the Makefile as follows:
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile
>> index 6030ff4aeb..89317f3979 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile
>> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile
>> @@ -809,7 +809,9 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_MX6UL) += \
>>          imx6ul-liteboard.dtb \
>>          imx6ul-phytec-segin-ff-rdk-nand.dtb \
>>          imx6ul-pico-hobbit.dtb \
>> -       imx6ul-pico-pi.dtb \
>> +       imx6ul-pico-pi.dtb
>> +
>> +dtb-$(CONFIG_TARGET_KONTRON_MX6UL) += \
>>          imx6ul-kontron-n631x-s.dtb \
>>          imx6ull-kontron-n641x-s.dtb
>>
>> Note: if this could be an accepted solution, I have no problems to do it - on at91 is accepted, too. But I am wondering what is happening, it looks like a CONFIG_ is missing, but in the other boards and not yours.
>>
>> Any idea ?
> 
> It looks like when boards don't have CONFIG_FIT set then CONFIG_FIT_EXTERNAL_OFFSET is not defined, but my devicetree uses this and is compiled for all of the boards as it is under CONFIG_MX6UL.
> 
> Instead of separating the dts, we could also add a "#if defined(CONFIG_FIT)" around the binman nodes in the dts. I saw that other boards also do this (e. g. socfpga_soc64_fit-u-boot.dtsi).

Yes, you're right. Anyway, it looks like just to make build happy, and I 
do not see any added value if Kontron's DT are compiled without the 
section. But as this is done for other boards, too, it is fine.

> 
> Shall I send an update with this fix?
> 

Yes, please. Just the last two patches, I have already applied the first 
ones.

Regards,
Stefano

> Best regards
> Frieder
> 


-- 
=====================================================================
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: +49-8142-66989-53 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: sbabic at denx.de
=====================================================================