Hi Tom, On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 at 12:07, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 06:33:35PM +0100, François Ozog wrote: > > Hi Simon > > > > Le lun. 1 nov. 2021 à 17:58, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> a écrit : > > > > > Hi Peter, > > > > > > On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 at 04:48, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 at 01:33, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Add this file, generated from qemu, so there is a reference devicetree > > > > > in the U-Boot tree. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > > > > > > > > Note that the dtb you get from QEMU is only guaranteed to work if: > > > > 1) you run it on the exact same QEMU version you generated it with > > > > 2) you pass QEMU the exact same command line arguments you used > > > > when you generated it > > > > > > Yes, I certainly understand that. In general this is not safe, but in > > > practice it works well enough for development and CI. > > > > You recognize that you hijack a product directory with development hack > > facility. There is a test directory to keep things clear. There can be a > > dev-dts or something similar for Dev time tools. > > I have only seen push back on those fake dts files in the dts directory: I > > guess that unless someone strongly favors a continuation of the discussion, > > you may consider re-shaping the proposal to address concerns. > > Yes. We need to document how to make development easier. But I'm still > not on board with the notion of including DTS files for platforms where > the source of truth for the DTB is elsewhere. That's going to bring us > a lot more pain.
Are you talking about QEMU specifically, or Raspberry Pi? How can we get this resolved? I very much want to get to just having OF_SEPARATE and OF_EMBED as the only available build-time options, with OF_BOARD (and perhaps OF_PASSAGE) as something we can enable for runtime support. I feel that separating the build-time and run-time behaviour is very important. Over time perhaps we will have some success in upstreaming bindings, but for now we have what we have. There is still a lot of pushback on U-Boot having things in the devicetree, although I do see that softening somewhat. > > It is important to make sure our "develop our project" workflow is sane > and relatively pain free. But that needs to not come by making > sacrifices to the "use our project" outcome. I would hope for example > that the new Pi zero platform is just dtb changes, as far as the linux > kernel is concerned which means that for rpi_arm64 (which uses run time > dtb) it also just works. And that's what we want to see. So long as OF_BOARD is enabled then the flow should work as you expect. Regards, Simon