[PATCH v3 2/6] treewide: bcb: move ab_select command to bcb subcommands
Dmitry Rokosov
ddrokosov at salutedevices.com
Wed Oct 16 16:06:54 CEST 2024
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 05:26:37PM +0200, Mattijs Korpershoek wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> On mar., oct. 15, 2024 at 16:26, Dmitry Rokosov <ddrokosov at salutedevices.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Mattijs,
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 02:10:10PM +0200, Mattijs Korpershoek wrote:
> >> Hi Simon, Dmitry
> >>
> >> On lun., oct. 14, 2024 at 15:06, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Dmitry,
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 at 14:38, Dmitry Rokosov
> >> > <ddrokosov at salutedevices.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hello Mattijs,
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 10:49:08AM +0200, Mattijs Korpershoek wrote:
> >> >> > Hi Dmitry,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On ven., oct. 11, 2024 at 21:00, Dmitry Rokosov <ddrokosov at salutedevices.com> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 04:20:39PM +0200, Mattijs Korpershoek wrote:
> >> >> > >> On ven., oct. 11, 2024 at 15:30, "Mattijs Korpershoek via groups.io" <mkorpershoek=baylibre.com at groups.io> wrote:
> >> >> > >>
> >> >> > >> > Hi Dmitry,
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > Thank you for the patch.
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > On mar., oct. 08, 2024 at 23:18, Dmitry Rokosov <ddrokosov at salutedevices.com> wrote:
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> >> To enhance code organization, it is beneficial to consolidate all A/B
> >> >> > >> >> BCB management routines into a single super-command.
> >> >> > >> >> The 'bcb' command is an excellent candidate for this purpose.
> >> >> > >> >>
> >> >> > >> >> This patch integrates the separate 'ab_select' command into the 'bcb'
> >> >> > >> >> group as the 'ab_select' subcommand, maintaining the same parameter list
> >> >> > >> >> for consistency.
> >> >> > >> >>
> >> >> > >> >> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Rokosov <ddrokosov at salutedevices.com>
> >> >> > >> >> ---
> >> >> > >> >> MAINTAINERS | 1 -
> >> >> > >> >> cmd/Kconfig | 15 +------
> >> >> > >> >> cmd/Makefile | 1 -
> >> >> > >> >> cmd/ab_select.c | 66 -------------------------------
> >> >> > >> >> cmd/bcb.c | 63 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> >> > >> >> configs/am57xx_hs_evm_usb_defconfig | 1 -
> >> >> > >> >> configs/khadas-vim3_android_ab_defconfig | 1 -
> >> >> > >> >> configs/khadas-vim3l_android_ab_defconfig | 1 -
> >> >> > >> >> configs/sandbox64_defconfig | 4 +-
> >> >> > >> >> configs/sandbox_defconfig | 4 +-
> >> >> > >> >> doc/android/ab.rst | 12 +++---
> >> >> > >> >> include/configs/khadas-vim3_android.h | 2 +-
> >> >> > >> >> include/configs/khadas-vim3l_android.h | 2 +-
> >> >> > >> >> include/configs/meson64_android.h | 4 +-
> >> >> > >> >> include/configs/ti_omap5_common.h | 4 +-
> >> >> > >> >> test/py/tests/test_android/test_ab.py | 8 ++--
> >> >> > >> >> 16 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 104 deletions(-)
> >> >> > >> >>
> >> >> > >> >> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> >> >> > >> >> index 7aefda93d017f07d616f0f6d191129914fbeb484..668ccec9ae6df47192b1af668e3fdbeb1dfa15ea 100644
> >> >> > >> >> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> >> >> > >> >> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> >> >> > >> >> @@ -65,7 +65,6 @@ R: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko at linaro.org>
> >> >> > >> >> S: Maintained
> >> >> > >> >> T: git https://source.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-dfu.git
> >> >> > >> >> F: boot/android_ab.c
> >> >> > >> >> -F: cmd/ab_select.c
> >> >> > >> >> F: doc/android/ab.rst
> >> >> > >> >> F: include/android_ab.h
> >> >> > >> >> F: test/py/tests/test_android/test_ab.py
> >> >> > >> >> diff --git a/cmd/Kconfig b/cmd/Kconfig
> >> >> > >> >> index dd33266cec70a2b134b7244acae1b7f098b921e8..11e8d363dc9b137723a86a240412d82dd0dbccc5 100644
> >> >> > >> >> --- a/cmd/Kconfig
> >> >> > >> >> +++ b/cmd/Kconfig
> >> >> > >> >> @@ -1067,6 +1067,7 @@ config CMD_ADC
> >> >> > >> >> config CMD_BCB
> >> >> > >> >> bool "bcb"
> >> >> > >> >> depends on PARTITIONS
> >> >> > >> >> + depends on ANDROID_AB
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > When building with khadas-vim3_android_defconfig, we can see that CMD_BCB is no
> >> >> > >> > longer part of that build:
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > $ grep CMD_BCB .config
> >> >> > >> > <empty>
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > However, if we look at include/configs/meson64_android.h, we can see
> >> >> > >> > that the "bcb" command is not only used for checking the _slot suffix.
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > It's also used for checking the bootloader reason. For example, in
> >> >> > >> > BOOTENV_DEV_FASTBOOT, we call:
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > "if bcb test command = bootonce-bootloader; then " \
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > Since CMD_BCB is no longer part of the .config (due to this dependency),
> >> >> > >> > the boot script now shows errors:
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > """
> >> >> > >> > U-Boot 2024.10-00796-g969325278805 (Oct 11 2024 - 14:46:00 +0200) khadas-vim3
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > Model: Khadas VIM3
> >> >> > >> > SoC: Amlogic Meson G12B (A311D) Revision 29:b (10:2)
> >> >> > >> > DRAM: 2 GiB (effective 3.8 GiB)
> >> >> > >> > Core: 411 devices, 36 uclasses, devicetree: separate
> >> >> > >> > MMC: mmc at ffe03000: 0, mmc at ffe05000: 1, mmc at ffe07000: 2
> >> >> > >> > Loading Environment from MMC... fs uses incompatible features: 00020000, ignoring
> >> >> > >> > Reading from MMC(2)... *** Warning - bad CRC, using default environment
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > In: usbkbd,serial
> >> >> > >> > Out: vidconsole,serial
> >> >> > >> > Err: vidconsole,serial
> >> >> > >> > Net: eth0: ethernet at ff3f0000
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0
> >> >> > >> > Verify GPT: success!
> >> >> > >> > Unknown command 'bcb' - try 'help'
> >> >> > >> > Warning: BCB is corrupted or does not exist
> >> >> > >> > dev: pinctrl at 14
> >> >> > >> > dev: pinctrl at 40
> >> >> > >> > gpio: pin 88 (gpio 88) value is 1
> >> >> > >> > Unknown command 'bcb' - try 'help'
> >> >> > >> > Warning: BCB is corrupted or does not exist
> >> >> > >> > Loading Android boot partition...
> >> >> > >> > switch to partitions #0, OK
> >> >> > >> > mmc2(part 0) is current device
> >> >> > >> > """
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > I know we should not be using a boot script, nor non A/B configs but
> >> >> > >> > it's a bummer that this series breaks an upstream
> >> >> > >> > defconfig (khadas-vim3_android_defconfig)
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > My recommendation:
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > Make BCB_CMD_AB_SELECT implementation dependant on ANDROID_AB.
> >> >> > >> > This way, users can use CMD_BCB with and without ANDROID_AB being enabled.
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > We could do:
> >> >> > >> > When ANDROID_AB=y, implement bcb ab_select subcommand
> >> >> > >> > When ANDROID_AB=n, command is not accessible.
> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> > >> > I'll send you a diff shortly for this.
> >> >> > >>
> >> >> > >> Here is an illustration on how that would work:
> >> >> > >>
> >> >> > >> diff --git a/cmd/Kconfig b/cmd/Kconfig
> >> >> > >> index 861c31e26408..e1a4a97b042d 100644
> >> >> > >> --- a/cmd/Kconfig
> >> >> > >> +++ b/cmd/Kconfig
> >> >> > >> @@ -1055,7 +1055,6 @@ config CMD_ADC
> >> >> > >> config CMD_BCB
> >> >> > >> bool "bcb"
> >> >> > >> depends on PARTITIONS
> >> >> > >> - depends on ANDROID_AB
> >> >> > >> help
> >> >> > >> Read/modify/write the fields of Bootloader Control Block, usually
> >> >> > >> stored on the flash "misc" partition with its structure defined in:
> >> >> > >> diff --git a/cmd/bcb.c b/cmd/bcb.c
> >> >> > >> index 4fd32186ae65..4fe634f14cc5 100644
> >> >> > >> --- a/cmd/bcb.c
> >> >> > >> +++ b/cmd/bcb.c
> >> >> > >> @@ -438,6 +438,9 @@ static int do_bcb_ab_select(struct cmd_tbl *cmdtp, int flag, int argc,
> >> >> > >> char slot[2];
> >> >> > >> bool dec_tries = true;
> >> >> > >>
> >> >> > >> + if (!CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(AB_SELECT))
> >> >> > >> + return CMD_RET_SUCCESS;
> >> >> > >> +
> >> >> > >> for (int i = 4; i < argc; i++) {
> >> >> > >> if (!strcmp(argv[i], "--no-dec"))
> >> >> > >> dec_tries = false;
> >> >> > >> @@ -474,6 +477,9 @@ static int do_bcb_ab_dump(struct cmd_tbl *cmdtp, int flag, int argc,
> >> >> > >> struct blk_desc *dev_desc;
> >> >> > >> struct disk_partition part_info;
> >> >> > >>
> >> >> > >> + if (!CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(AB_SELECT))
> >> >> > >> + return CMD_RET_SUCCESS;
> >> >> > >> +
> >> >> > >> if (part_get_info_by_dev_and_name_or_num(argv[1], argv[2],
> >> >> > >> &dev_desc, &part_info,
> >> >> > >> false) < 0) {
> >> >> > >>
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > We also need to include an #ifdef directive for the ab_select_slot()
> >> >> > > function usage; otherwise, the code will not compile successfully.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Are you sure? Per my understanding, it's possible that the compiler
> >> >> > optimizes this out because CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(AB_SELECT)
> >> >> > is known as build time.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > When I tried this diff with khadas-vim3_android_defconfig I did not see
> >> >> > any build errors. I will try again early next week.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> As I recall, the IS_ENABLED() mechanism serves as a runtime checker to
> >> >> determine whether specific CONFIG_* options are enabled. Consequently,
> >> >> all code paths under this mechanism are always compiled. I attempted to
> >> >> disable CONFIG_ANDROID_AB for the sandbox_defconfig, but it resulted in
> >> >> the expected linker error.
> >> >>
> >> >> /tmp/ccAvYrKL.ltrans25.ltrans.o: In function `do_bcb_ab_select':
> >> >> <artificial>:(.text+0x6d5d): undefined reference to `ab_select_slot'
> >> >> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
> >> >> Makefile:1813: recipe for target 'u-boot' failed
> >> >> make: *** [u-boot] Error 1
> >> >>
> >> >> I have already prepared a new version using #ifdef directives. I will
> >> >> send it shortly.
> >> >
> >> > Something else is going on here, since we do this all the time and
> >> > rely on it. So long as the code is behind an if() the dead code should
> >> > be eliminated.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I have passed my diff (using CONFIG_IS_ENABLED) through the U-Boot CI:
> >> https://source.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-dfu/-/pipelines/22700
> >>
> >> See the branch:
> >> https://source.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-dfu/-/commits/dmitry/ab-dump-v3
> >>
> >> There are some test errors (sandbox test) but the "world build" stage
> >> finished sucessfully.
> >>
> >> I have also tested locally using the CI container:
> >> $ cd ~/work/upstream/u-boot
> >> $ git clean -xdf
> >> $ make mproper
> >> $ docker run -v $PWD:$PWD -it trini/u-boot-gitlab-ci-runner:jammy-20240227-14Mar2024 /bin/bash
> >>
> >> # In container
> >> uboot at 0ba059e8b7af/$ cd /home/mkorpershoek/work/upstream/u-boot
> >> uboot at 0ba059e8b7af:/home/mkorpershoek/work/upstream/u-boot$ pip install -r test/py/requirements.txt
> >> uboot at 0ba059e8b7af:/home/mkorpershoek/work/upstream/u-boot$ ./test/py/test.py --bd sandbox --build -k test_ut
> >>
> >> No build errors either.
> >>
> >> Dmitry, can you clarify what compiler/build commands you've used to see
> >> that error?
> >>
> >> For reference, here is what buildman has in the CI container:
> >>
> >> uboot at 0ba059e8b7af:/home/mkorpershoek/work/upstream/u-boot$ ./tools/buildman/buildman --list-tool-chains
> >> List of available toolchains (17):
> >> aarch64 : /opt/gcc-13.2.0-nolibc/aarch64-linux/bin/aarch64-linux-gcc
> >> arc : /opt/gcc-13.2.0-nolibc/arc-linux/bin/arc-linux-gcc
> >> arm : /opt/gcc-13.2.0-nolibc/arm-linux-gnueabi/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc
> >> c89 : /usr/bin/c89-gcc
> >> c99 : /usr/bin/c99-gcc
> >> i386 : /opt/gcc-13.2.0-nolibc/i386-linux/bin/i386-linux-gcc
> >> m68k : /opt/gcc-13.2.0-nolibc/m68k-linux/bin/m68k-linux-gcc
> >> microblaze: /opt/gcc-13.2.0-nolibc/microblaze-linux/bin/microblaze-linux-gcc
> >> mips : /opt/gcc-13.2.0-nolibc/mips-linux/bin/mips-linux-gcc
> >> nios2 : /opt/gcc-13.2.0-nolibc/nios2-linux/bin/nios2-linux-gcc
> >> powerpc : /opt/gcc-13.2.0-nolibc/powerpc-linux/bin/powerpc-linux-gcc
> >> riscv32 : /opt/gcc-13.2.0-nolibc/riscv32-linux/bin/riscv32-linux-gcc
> >> riscv64 : /opt/gcc-13.2.0-nolibc/riscv64-linux/bin/riscv64-linux-gcc
> >> sandbox : /usr/bin/cgcc
> >> sh2 : /opt/gcc-13.2.0-nolibc/sh2-linux/bin/sh2-linux-gcc
> >> x86_64 : /usr/bin/x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc
> >> xtensa : /opt/2020.07/xtensa-dc233c-elf/bin/xtensa-dc233c-elf-gcc
> >>
> >> I think we should use CONFIG_IS_ENABLED if possible
> >
> > I just run build on the my x86 Ubuntu machine.
> >
> > $ cd uboot
> > $ make mproper
> > $ make sandbox_defconfig
> > $ make -j$(nproc)
>
> I tried these commands:
> Here is the successfull build output:
>
> https://paste.debian.net/1332378/
>
> I use:
> $ ~/work/upstream/u-boot-dfu/ dmitry/ab-dump-v3* gcc --version
> gcc (GCC) 14.2.1 20240912 (Red Hat 14.2.1-3)
> Copyright (C) 2024 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
> warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
>
> $ ~/work/upstream/u-boot-dfu/ dmitry/ab-dump-v3* ld --version
> GNU ld version 2.41-37.fc40
> Copyright (C) 2023 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> This program is free software; you may redistribute it under the terms of
> the GNU General Public License version 3 or (at your option) a later version.
> This program has absolutely no warranty.
>
> What toolchains do you use?
>
By default, my machine, which I typically use for cross-compilation, has
an outdated toolchain version:
$ gcc --version
gcc (Ubuntu 7.5.0-3ubuntu1~18.04) 7.5.0
Copyright (C) 2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
$ ld --version
GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Ubuntu) 2.30
Copyright (C) 2018 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This program is free software; you may redistribute it under the terms of
the GNU General Public License version 3 or (at your option) a later version.
This program has absolutely no warranty.
> >
> > That's all.
> >
> > I've already sent the v4 patch with #ifdef. I can prepare the v5 patch
> > using the IS_ENABLED() macro and will aim to send it today.
> >
> > But I have one question:
> >
> > Do we really want to display the ab_select and ab_dump subcommands to
> > users if these commands are just stubs? Perhaps we should consider
> > adding #ifdef directives to the subcommand arrays.
>
> That's a valid concern. I don't think we should display
> the ab_select and ab_dump commands to the users but I still want to have
> IS_ENABLED wherever possible to keep the code simple.
--
Thank you,
Dmitry
More information about the U-Boot
mailing list