[PATCH] arm64: zynqmp: Do not describe u-boot.itb if SPL is disabled

[Ilias Apalodimas]

On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 at 08:42, Michal Simek <michal.simek at amd.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 3/12/24 20:12, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Mar 2024 at 17:55, Michal Simek <michal.simek at amd.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 3/12/24 07:14, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
> >>> Hi Michal
> >>>
> >>> Apologies for the late reply
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 at 09:48, Michal Simek <michal.simek at amd.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 3/5/24 16:47, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
> >>>>> On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 05:18:42PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> >>>>>> There is no reason to describe u-boot.itb on system without SPL. Pretty
> >>>>>> much this is cover all systems which are using only boot.bin which contains
> >>>>>> all images inside.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek at amd.com>
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>     board/xilinx/common/board.c | 2 +-
> >>>>>>     1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> diff --git a/board/xilinx/common/board.c b/board/xilinx/common/board.c
> >>>>>> index 9641ed307b75..4f38b7d27684 100644
> >>>>>> --- a/board/xilinx/common/board.c
> >>>>>> +++ b/board/xilinx/common/board.c
> >>>>>> @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ struct efi_fw_image fw_images[] = {
> >>>>>>                .image_index = 1,
> >>>>>>        },
> >>>>>>     #endif
> >>>>>> -#if defined(XILINX_UBOOT_IMAGE_GUID)
> >>>>>> +#if defined(XILINX_UBOOT_IMAGE_GUID) && defined(CONFIG_SPL_FS_LOAD_PAYLOAD_NAME)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What happens if this is defined with CONFIG_SPL_FS_LOAD_PAYLOAD_NAME="" ?
> >>>>
> >>>> Your comment is valid but I am not aware about any CONFIG_IS, etc which checks
> >>>> that string is not empty. If name is "" it will return yes and second image is
> >>>> doing to be defined.
> >>>>
> >>>> But I found handling in the code like this.
> >>>>
> >>>>     36 #ifdef CONFIG_DEFAULT_FDT_FILE
> >>>>     37                 if (strlen(CONFIG_DEFAULT_FDT_FILE)) {
> >>>>
> >>>> which can be used in my second patch not to describe second image in
> >>>> set_dfu_alt_info() if string is empty.
> >>>
> >>> Yes, I think that's ok. The problem is that if we merge this as-is, we
> >>> would have to disable CONFIG_SPL_FS_FAT to make this work, which is a
> >>> bit misleading
> >>
> >> As Heinrich said not just this if you want to do it like this.
> >> I think you will simply disable the whole SPL which will disable this symbol too.
> >> But from my perspective SPL payload name is driving this option. Data can end up
> >> on partition or in raw mode but for dfu you need to use the name.
> >
> > Yes, but isn't SPL selected by the Kconfig automatically? I can't seem
> > to be able to disable it for the kria platforms
>
> Not in upstream but via your/AMD build in meta-ts.
>
> Thanks,
> Michal
>

Reviewed-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas at linaro.org>