[PATCH v1] imx: Kconfig: make IMX8_ROMAPI configurable

[Tom Rini]

On Mon, Oct 07, 2024 at 11:46:03AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com>
> > Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 6:51 AM
> > To: Marek Vasut <marex at denx.de>
> > Cc: Alice Guo (OSS) <alice.guo at oss.nxp.com>; u-boot at lists.denx.de;
> > sbabic at denx.de; festevam at gmail.com; dl-uboot-imx <uboot-
> > imx at nxp.com>; Peng Fan <peng.fan at nxp.com>; Ross, Fedor
> > <fedor.ross at ifm.com>; Ye Li <ye.li at nxp.com>; seanga2 at gmail.com;
> > Alice Guo <alice.guo at nxp.com>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] imx: Kconfig: make IMX8_ROMAPI
> > configurable
> > 
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2024 at 12:28:44AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > On 10/6/24 11:23 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Oct 06, 2024 at 07:31:16AM +0800,
> > alice.guo at oss.nxp.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan at nxp.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > Make CONFIG_IMX8_ROMAPI could be configured in defconfig.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan at nxp.com>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Alice Guo <alice.guo at nxp.com>
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Ye Li <ye.li at nxp.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >   arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig | 3 ++-
> > > > >   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-
> > imx/Kconfig
> > > > > index 134e42028c..9d3aafd2f8 100644
> > > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig
> > > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig
> > > > > @@ -179,7 +179,8 @@ config DDRMC_VF610_CALIBRATION
> > > > >   	  the ddrmc_cr_setting on relevant board file.
> > > > >   config IMX8_ROMAPI
> > > > > -	def_bool y
> > > > > +	bool "Enable i.MX ROMAPI"
> > > > > +	default y
> > > > >   	depends on IMX8MN || IMX8MP || IMX8ULP || IMX9
> > > >
> > > > Since there's no help here, is this truly configurable, or is this
> > > > something that should be select'd based on the SoC and
> > presumably
> > > > some of the newer IMX9 parts cannot use this?
> > > I can imagine the MX95 calls into this custom ELE firmware stuff
> > > instead of ROMAPI ?
> > 
> > Alright. Perhaps this should be depending on the above and !main-ELE-
> > symbol instead.
> 
> Nope. To i.MX93, ELE and ROMAPI are both valid. There is case that
> ROMAPI needs to be false while ELE is still true.

Alright, but where is the choice made? As in, can a normal i.MX93 board
use one or the other, or will it depend on specific SoCs in the family?
And is disabling this option even valid on the i.MX8 families?

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 659 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20241007/7824f380/attachment.sig>