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

[Ilias Apalodimas]

Hi Michal

On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 at 09:01, Ilias Apalodimas
<ilias.apalodimas at linaro.org> wrote:
>
> 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>

Trying to compile xilinx_zynqmp_kria_defconfig with CONFIG_SPL unset
blows up with

 HOSTCC  scripts/dtc/dtc-lexer.lex.o
  HOSTCC  scripts/dtc/dtc-parser.tab.o
  COPY    u-boot.its
cp: missing destination file operand after 'u-boot.its'
Try 'cp --help' for more information.
make: *** [Makefile:1405: u-boot.its] Error 1
make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
  HOSTLD  scripts/dtc/dtc

Cheers
/Ilias