Strange construct in binman description

[Tim Harvey]

On Sun, Jul 30, 2023 at 7:50 PM Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Tim,
>
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2023 at 17:42, Tim Harvey <tharvey at gateworks.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 26, 2023, 5:55 PM Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Tim,
> >>
> >> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 at 08:53, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, 23 Jul 2023 at 03:00, Marcel Ziswiler
> >> > <marcel.ziswiler at toradex.com> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Hi Simon
> >> > >
> >> > > On Jul 23, 2023 05:48, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Hi Marcel,
> >> > >
> >> > > I just noticed this in an imx8 description:
> >> > >
> >> > > binman_configuration: @config-SEQ {
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > I remember having stumbled over this before but I do not remember any exact details, sorry.
> >> > >
> >> > > Since this is a generator node, binman blindly generates a phandle for
> >> > > each not it generates. This means that if there is more than one
> >> > > config node, then they will have duplicate phandles.
> >> > >
> >> > > I have sent a series to correct this, but it fails the build on:
> >> > > imx8mm_venice imx8mn_venice imx8mp_venice
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Ah, now I get it. You mixed up venice (Gate works) with verdin (Toradex).
> >> > >
> >> > > I am a bit unsure about what this is supposed to do. Could you please
> >> > > take a look?
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > I'm more than happy to do that but you are probably much better off enquiring Tim Harvey from Gateworks about this. I put him on CC.
> >> >
> >> > Tim, any thoughts on this please?
> >>
> >> Can you please weigh in on this one?
> >
> >
> > Simon,
> >
> > I'm away from a computer until next week.
> >
> > Can you point me to the series in reference here?
> >
> > The -seq is for configs that support multiple dtbs which the Venice configs use.
>
> This is referring to code in mainline. it seems to have a phandle in a
> FIT template node, which means that Binman will generate multiple
> nodes with duplicate phandles.
>

Simon,

I don't know where the original discussion on this thread is from but
what I found is that your commit d4d97661d255: ("binman: Support
templates containing phandles") broke imx8mm_venice_defconfig,
imx8mn_venice_defconfig, and imx8mp_venice_defconfig. I see that you
merged commit 288ae53cb736: ("binman: Add a temporary hack for
duplicate phandles") while I was away as a temporary workaround for
these three boards instead of reverting the patch so I suppose we need
to figure out how to address it then remove your workaround.

The imx8mm-u-boot.dtsi contains a configurations node in the FIT image
to build configs for each dtb from CONFIG_OF_LIST.

configurations {
  default = "@config-DEFAULT-SEQ";

  binman_configuration: @config-SEQ {
    description = "NAME";
    fdt = "fdt-SEQ";
    firmware = "uboot";
#ifndef CONFIG_ARMV8_PSCI
    loadables = "atf";
#endif
  };
};

These three boards are the only imx8m* boards that support multiple
dtb's. If I look at the fit image (dtc -I dtb -O dts itb.fit.fit -f) I
see the following for imx8mm_venice_defconfig:

        configurations {
                default = "config-1";

                config-1 {
                        description = "imx8mm-venice";
                        fdt = "fdt-1";
                        firmware = "uboot";
                        loadables = "atf";
                        phandle = <0x7f>;
                };

                config-2 {
                        description = "imx8mm-venice-gw71xx-0x";
                        fdt = "fdt-2";
                        firmware = "uboot";
                        loadables = "atf";
                        phandle = <0x7f>;
                };

                config-3 {
                        description = "imx8mm-venice-gw72xx-0x";
                        fdt = "fdt-3";
                        firmware = "uboot";
                        loadables = "atf";
                        phandle = <0x7f>;
                };

                config-4 {
                        description = "imx8mm-venice-gw73xx-0x";
                        fdt = "fdt-4";
                        firmware = "uboot";
                        loadables = "atf";
                        phandle = <0x7f>;
                };

                config-5 {
                        description = "imx8mm-venice-gw7901";
                        fdt = "fdt-5";
                        firmware = "uboot";
                        loadables = "atf";
                        phandle = <0x7f>;
                };

                config-6 {
                        description = "imx8mm-venice-gw7902";
                        fdt = "fdt-6";
                        firmware = "uboot";
                        loadables = "atf";
                        phandle = <0x7f>;
                };

                config-7 {
                        description = "imx8mm-venice-gw7903";
                        fdt = "fdt-7";
                        firmware = "uboot";
                        loadables = "atf";
                        phandle = <0x7f>;
                };
        };
};

So yeah... it doesn't make sense that each config has the same phandle
value but this tells me that U-Boot must not use these phandles as
this has never presented a problem before. The venice
board_fit_config_name_match() function gets called with each dtb to
choose which dtb and that works fine. Does U-Boot even use the
configurations node? Perhaps it uses the configurations node but
doesn't use the phandles?

Best Regards,

Tim