On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 9:17 PM Sean Anderson <sean...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 5/7/21 9:11 AM, Bin Meng wrote: > > On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 9:03 PM Sean Anderson <sean...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> On 5/6/21 11:48 PM, Tianrui Wei wrote: > >>> > >>> On 5/7/2021 11:41 AM, Sean Anderson wrote: > >>>> On 5/6/21 11:28 PM, Tianrui Wei wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On 5/7/2021 11:15 AM, Sean Anderson wrote: > >>>>>> On 5/6/21 11:06 PM, Tianrui Wei wrote: > >>>>>>> Hi Sean, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Many thanks again for reviewing our code! We really appreciate it. > >>>>>>> Will fix the things you're suggesting ;p Though I have a few > >>>>>>> questions in line in the comment. Also, checkpatch didn't catch any > >>>>>>> of the identation issues. I was wondering if there are some specific > >>>>>>> flags to enable some of the checks? I'm running ./utils/checkpatch.pl > >>>>>>> this.patch right now. > >>>>>>> > > > > [snip] > > > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> No we don't support fit yet for some hardware reasons. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Can you elaborate on that? I wasn't aware of any restrictions in this > >>>>>> area. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> So OpenPiton is actually some kind of SoC generator that generates > >>>>> different SoC on FPGA. The device tree was generated at bitstream > >>>>> creation time to facilitate different configurations, so each board > >>>>> can have different device trees. We're aware of any way to do this in > >>>>> FIT. > >>>> > >>>> Oh, so you're saying that the devicetree is placed at a specific address > >>>> in hardware? Does it need any fixups? > >>> > >>> > >>> No for now we just embed it in SPL, will be converted into the bootrom > >>> for the chip with a small ZSBL. > >> > >> Well, atm you are using the DTS embedded in U-Boot. > >> > >> I don't know what the correct way to do this is... > >> > >> +CC Bin, Heinrich: Do you have a comment on this? > > > > I am not sure I followed this correctly. Ideally we should use OF_SEPARATE. > > As I understand it, Tianrui would like to use the same FDT that U-Boot > uses for Linux as well. Is doing something like > > >> + "fdt addr ${fdtcontroladdr}; " \ > >> + "fdt move ${fdtcontroladdr} ${fdt_addr_r}; " \ > >> + "booti ${loadaddr} - ${fdt_addr_r}; "
Does "booti loadaddr - fdtcontroladdr" work? Or we have to do "fdt move"? > > the right way to go about this? Can any other platforms be used as a > reference here (perhaps qemu)? I think this way is okay, as long as U-Boot's device tree is the superset of the Linux one. Regards, Bin