[PATCH v4 15/19] board: am62px: Define capsule update firmware info

[Ilias Apalodimas]

On Fri, 31 May 2024 at 07:10, Jon Humphreys <j-humphreys at ti.com> wrote:
>
> Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas at linaro.org> writes:
>
> > Hi Jon,
> >
> > On Fri, 24 May 2024 at 18:38, Jon Humphreys <j-humphreys at ti.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas at linaro.org> writes:
> >>
> >> > Hi Jonathan
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for working on this
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 11:41:19AM -0500, Jonathan Humphreys wrote:
> >> >> Define the firmware components updatable via EFI capsule update, including
> >> >> defining capsule GUIDs for the various firmware components for the AM62px
> >> >> SK.
> >> >>
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Humphreys <j-humphreys at ti.com>
> >> >> ---
> >> >>  board/ti/am62px/evm.c        | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> >>  include/configs/am62px_evm.h | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> >>  2 files changed, 56 insertions(+)
> >> >>
> >> >> diff --git a/board/ti/am62px/evm.c b/board/ti/am62px/evm.c
> >> >> index 97a95ce8cc2..6d0f66e5dc0 100644
> >> >> --- a/board/ti/am62px/evm.c
> >> >> +++ b/board/ti/am62px/evm.c
> >> >> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
> >> >>   *
> >> >>   */
> >> >>
> >> >> +#include <efi_loader.h>
> >> >>  #include <asm/arch/hardware.h>
> >> >>  #include <asm/io.h>
> >> >>  #include <dm/uclass.h>
> >> >> @@ -13,6 +14,37 @@
> >> >>  #include <fdt_support.h>
> >> >>  #include <spl.h>
> >> >>
> >> >> +struct efi_fw_image fw_images[] = {
> >> >
> >> > It's better if we add an
> >> > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EFI_HAVE_CAPSULE_SUPPORT)
> >> > for both of the structs that follow (and it applies to all your patches)
> >> >
> >>
> >> Ilias, thanks for the reviews.
> >>
> >> I had this protected in #if's in an earlier patch set, as you suggest here.
> >> However, in those reviews, Roger recommended that we don't do that and put
> >> conditions around the use of it in set_dfu_alt_info().
> >>
> >
> > Hmm but the function prototype itself is on an ifdef. If you want to
> > remove the ifdef you got to do it everywhere
> >
>
> Are you referring to set_dfu_alt_info() which is guarded by
> CONFIG_SET_DFU_ALT_INFO?

Yes

>
> If so, that is separate but I can add a CONFIG_SET_DFU_ALT_INFO guard
> around the definition, for now. But IMO it is a bit of a mess because it's
> use and board specific defs are guarded by CONFIG_SET_DFU_ALT_INFO but the
> weak/default definition is guarded by CONFIG_EFI_CAPSULE_FIRMWARE, which
> causes problems because the configs are not always the same for all builds.

Indeed

> I was wanting to fix that too so I might do that as a separate patch and
> make that patch a prerequisite for this series, which then allows me to
> remove the definitions of set_dfu_alt_info() in this series.
>

We can clean it up later sure, but for now put it under an IS_ENABLED
so we have the same mess everywhere :)

Thanks
/Ilias
> Jon
>
> > Thanks
> > /Ilias
> >
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/b19f02e0-a80a-46d6-8296-5d516577766a@kernel.org/
> >>
> >> I assume the reasoning is to reduce #if's in the code and rely on the
> >> compiler to be smart enough to remove dead data. (Roger, speak up if I
> >> misrepresent you.)
> >>
> >> I'm ok to do either way.  What is the preferred way in U-Boot?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Jon
> >>
> >> >> +    {
> >> >> +            .image_type_id = AM62PX_SK_TIBOOT3_IMAGE_GUID,
> >> >> +            .fw_name = u"AM62PX_SK_TIBOOT3",
> >> >> +            .image_index = 1,
> >> >> +    },
> >> >> +    {
> >> >> +            .image_type_id = AM62PX_SK_SPL_IMAGE_GUID,
> >> >> +            .fw_name = u"AM62PX_SK_SPL",
> >> >> +            .image_index = 2,
> >> >> +    },
> >> >> +    {
> >> >> +            .image_type_id = AM62PX_SK_UBOOT_IMAGE_GUID,
> >> >> +            .fw_name = u"AM62PX_SK_UBOOT",
> >> >> +            .image_index = 3,
> >> >> +    }
> >> >> +};
> >> >> +
> >> >> +struct efi_capsule_update_info update_info = {
> >> >> +    .dfu_string = "sf 0:0=tiboot3.bin raw 0 80000;"
> >> >> +    "tispl.bin raw 80000 200000;u-boot.img raw 280000 400000",
> >> >> +    .num_images = ARRAY_SIZE(fw_images),
> >> >> +    .images = fw_images,
> >> >> +};
> >> >
> >> > I haven't worked on any TI platforms lately so I cant say much about the
> >> > naming and the flash regions. The definition seems correct
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> +
> >> >> +void set_dfu_alt_info(char *interface, char *devstr)
> >> >> +{
> >> >> +    if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EFI_HAVE_CAPSULE_SUPPORT))
> >> >> +            env_set("dfu_alt_info", update_info.dfu_string);
> >> >> +}
> >> >
> >> > There's a CONFIG_SET_DFU_ALT_INFO symbol. This better if we add a check here
> >> > as well
> >> >
> >> >> +
> >> >>  int board_init(void)
> >> >>  {
> >> >>      return 0;
> >> >> diff --git a/include/configs/am62px_evm.h b/include/configs/am62px_evm.h
> >> >> index 06b12860e21..57a1ba9dc3c 100644
> >> >> --- a/include/configs/am62px_evm.h
> >> >> +++ b/include/configs/am62px_evm.h
> >> >> @@ -8,6 +8,30 @@
> >> >>  #ifndef __CONFIG_AM62PX_EVM_H
> >> >>  #define __CONFIG_AM62PX_EVM_H
> >> >>
> >> > [...]
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> > /Ilias