[PATCH v2 21/33] emulation: fdt: Relax condition for OF_HAS_PRIOR_STAGE

[Simon Glass]

On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 at 08:14, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 08:01:22AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 at 14:40, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 07:32:17AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > > QEMU always gets its devicetree from the OF_BOARD mechanism so we should
> > > > not depend on !BLOBLIST here.
> > > >
> > > > The logic of PRIOR_STAGE is quite a mess, unfortuantely. We should rely
> > > > only standard passage to receive things from the prior stage. QEMU
> > > > should implement standard passage to provide its devicetree to U-Boot
> > > > However Linaro has blocked my patch to provide devicetree additions[1],
> > > > so little breath should be held in respect of either change.
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/20210926183410.256484-1-sjg@chromium.org/
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> > > > Fixes: 2b71470628c dts: OF_HAS_PRIOR_STAGE should depend on !BLOBLIST
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > (no changes since v1)
> > > >
> > > >  dts/Kconfig | 2 +-
> > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/dts/Kconfig b/dts/Kconfig
> > > > index 41a758e83a6..fc25a854708 100644
> > > > --- a/dts/Kconfig
> > > > +++ b/dts/Kconfig
> > > > @@ -191,7 +191,7 @@ config OF_BOARD
> > > >
> > > >  config OF_HAS_PRIOR_STAGE
> > > >       bool
> > > > -     depends on !BLOBLIST
> > > > +     depends on !BLOBLIST || ARCH_QEMU
> > > >       help
> > > >         Indicates that a prior stage of the firmware (before U-Boot proper)
> > > >         makes use of device tree and this board normally boots with that prior
> > >
> > > Since OF_HAS_PRIOR_STAGE has no prompt, it shouldn't have a depends line
> > > either really. I believe 2b71470628c is part of an attempt to say that
> > > if you have bloblist enabled then that's how the previous loader needs
> > > to pass the device tree. But indeed that's not quite how to enforce that
> > > kind of demand, so we should just drop the restriction here (and some
> > > other time fix the "imply OF_HAS_PRIOR_STAGE" to be "select
> > > OF_HAS_PRIOR_STAGE" because it's not prompted, imply is the wrong
> > > keyword.
> >
> > So, just drop the 'depends' line?
>
> Correct.

OK

>
> > I don't understand all this prior-stage stuff and I believe it is the
> > Wrong Direction. We should just say where the DT comes from.
>
> Yes, but we're all keen to not rehash years worth of discussion here
> either.

Indeed.

Regards,
SImon