[RFC PATCH 1/2 v2] tools: binman: control.py: Propagate bootph-* properties to supernodes

[Moteen Shah]

Hey Simon,

On 03/04/25 00:52, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Moteen,
>
> On Wed, 2 Apr 2025 at 22:01, Moteen Shah <m-shah at ti.com> wrote:
>> Hey Simon,
>>
>> On 29/03/25 05:17, Simon Glass wrote:
>>> Hi Moteen,
>>>
>>> On Thu, 27 Mar 2025 at 08:06, Moteen Shah <m-shah at ti.com> wrote:
>>>> Add a function to scan through all the nodes in the device-tree
>>>> recusively for bootph-* property. If found, propagate it to all
>>>> of its parent nodes up the hierarchy.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Moteen Shah <m-shah at ti.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    tools/binman/control.py | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>>>    1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tools/binman/control.py b/tools/binman/control.py
>>>> index e73c598298c..e739949d366 100644
>>>> --- a/tools/binman/control.py
>>>> +++ b/tools/binman/control.py
>>>> @@ -526,6 +526,35 @@ def _RemoveTemplates(parent):
>>>>            if node.name.startswith('template'):
>>>>                node.Delete()
>>>>
>>>> +def prop_bootph_to_parent(node, prop, dtb):
>>> I think the 'prop_' is a bit confusing, since you are dealing with
>>> properties! How about 'add_' as the prefix?
>> 'add_' should be more descriptive, will add that in v3.
>>
>>>> +    """Propagates bootph-* property to all the parent
>>>> +    nodes up the hierarchy
>>> First line should be a summary
>>>
>>> then blank line
>>>
>>> then describe the args...you can see this if you look at a few other functions.
>>
>> Noted, will rectify in v3.
>>
>>>> +    """
>>>> +    parent = node.parent
>>>> +    if parent == None or parent.props.get(prop):
>>> if not parent or ...
>>
>> Noted.
>>
>>
>>>> +       return
>>>> +
>>>> +    while parent:
>>>> +        parent.AddEmptyProp(prop, 0)
>>>> +        parent = parent.parent
>>>> +
>>>> +def scan_and_prop_bootph(node, dtb):
>>>> +    """Scan the device tree and set the bootph-* property if its present
>>>> +    in subnode
>>>> +
>>>> +    This is used to set the bootph-* property in the parent node if a
>>>> +    "bootph-*" property is found in any of the subnodes of the parent
>>>> +    node.
>>> comment style again
>>>
>>>> +    """
>>>> +    bootph_prop = ['bootph-all', 'bootph-some-ram', 'bootph-pre-ram', 'bootph-pre-sram']
>>>   From my understanding the only ones that matter are bootph-all and
>>> bootph-some-ram, since the SPL ones are handled by fdtgrep.
>>
>> Noted.
>>
>>
>>>> +
>>>> +    for props in bootph_prop:
>>> for prop
>>>
>>> (since it is just one)
>>>
>>>> +        if node.props.get(props):
>>>> +            prop_bootph_to_parent(node, props, dtb)
>>>> +
>>>> +    for subnode in node.subnodes:
>>>> +       scan_and_prop_bootph(subnode, dtb)
>>>> +
>>>>    def PrepareImagesAndDtbs(dtb_fname, select_images, update_fdt, use_expanded, indir):
>>>>        """Prepare the images to be processed and select the device tree
>>>>
>>>> @@ -563,7 +592,11 @@ def PrepareImagesAndDtbs(dtb_fname, select_images, update_fdt, use_expanded, ind
>>>>            indir = []
>>>>        dtb_fname = fdt_util.EnsureCompiled(dtb_fname, indir=indir)
>>>>        fname = tools.get_output_filename('u-boot.dtb.out')
>>>> -    tools.write_file(fname, tools.read_file(dtb_fname))
>>>> +    dtb = fdt.FdtScan(dtb_fname)
>>>> +    scan_and_prop_bootph(dtb.GetRoot(), dtb)
>>>> +    dtb.Sync(True)
>>>> +    tools.write_file(dtb_fname, dtb.GetContents())
>>>> +    tools.write_file(fname, dtb.GetContents())
>>> You shouldn't write back to the file created by the build. Do you need this?
>>
>> Had the same thought, but the build fails in non clean builds[0]. Did a
>> workaround[1] but then some essential template nodes ends up getting
>> deleted from u-boot.dtb. Finally, had to write back to the file
>> to resolve the issue.
> Can you push a tree somewhere. This could be a bug that I could fix.

You can use the tree here to recreate the non clean build issue mentioned:
https://github.com/Jamm02/U-Boot-patchwork/tree/bootph-patch-test

>
>>>>        dtb = fdt.FdtScan(fname)
>>>>
>>>>        node = _FindBinmanNode(dtb)
>>>> --
>>>> 2.34.1
>>>>
>>> The code looks fine to me apart from the nits.
>>>
>>> This addition needs a test - see ftest.py for some examples there. But
>>> basically just create a dts that has some props in it, then check that
>>> they got added.
>>
>> Included a test as well in the patchset[3]. Do let me know if there are
>> some changes required in it.
> Somehow I'm not seeing that in patchwork. It looks good but please try
> to keep lines <=80 cols.


Sure, will fix up in v3. Should I push a v3 or wait for you to fix the 
issue discussed above?

>
>
>>> I think testSimpleFitEncryptedData() could be a good example?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Simon
>> References:
>> [0]https://gist.github.com/Jamm02/2478a4f1186f3ba4a8cd7dbf1fb11e2f#file-non-clean-build
>> [1]https://gist.github.com/Jamm02/2478a4f1186f3ba4a8cd7dbf1fb11e2f#file-patch-tools-dtdoc-fdt-py
>> [3]https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20250327080642.2269856-3-m-shah@ti.com/
>>
>> Thanks for the review.
> Regards,
> Simon


Regards,
Moteen