[PATCH 06/12] rockchip: rk3399-gru: Include binman generated FIT in u-boot.rom image

[Simon Glass]

Hi Jonas,

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 at 09:50, Jonas Karlman <jonas at kwiboo.se> wrote:
>
> Hi Quentin and Simon,
>
> On 2024-12-13 15:30, Quentin Schulz wrote:
> > Hi Jonas,
> >
> > On 12/13/24 12:57 AM, Jonas Karlman wrote:
> >> The u-boot.rom image contain u-boot.img FIT instead of the FIT generated
> >> by binman for the u-boot-rockchip.bin image.
> >>
> >> Change to include the binman generated FIT for the u-boot.rom image.
> >>
> >> This change result in TF-A being included and the use sha256 instead of
> >> crc32 checksum in the u-boot.rom FIT.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jonas Karlman <jonas at kwiboo.se>
> >
> > IIRC Simon was fine with removing u-boot.rom support for RK3399 when I
> > asked months (probably years?) ago, if that hasn't changed, maybe we
> > should now.
>
> Good to know and fully agree, we should try to remove it now.
>
> I did a compare between u-boot-rockchip-spi.bin and u-boot.rom and after
> this series they are now identical for the full size of
> u-boot-rockchip-spi.bin.
>
> However, the u-boot.rom also has a copy of ~u-boot.bin and a fdtmap
> starting at 0x300000. I have no idea if they are used for anything,
> if they are it is probably not for bare metal booting (TPL+SPL).

I'm not sure about the extra u-boot.bin, but the fdtmap is so that
'binman ls -i xxx' works.

>
> Regards,
> Jonas
>
> >
> > Especially since the only RK3399 with CONGIG_HAS_ROM set are Bob and Kevin.
> >
> > @Simon, you said you tested the patch series on them, with which image
> > did you do that? Are you still fine with removing the u-boot.rom for RK3399?

Yes that's fine.

Basically all my testing is in my lab now, which you should be able to
use with gitlab.

Regards,
Simon