On Sunday 09 October 2022 08:45:03 Tom Rini wrote: > On Sun, Oct 09, 2022 at 02:41:19PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Friday 26 August 2022 10:53:58 Tom Rini wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 11:29:08AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > On Monday 08 August 2022 09:37:22 Tom Rini wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Aug 08, 2022 at 09:51:49AM +0200, Marek Behún wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 5 Aug 2022 18:20:19 -0400 > > > > > > Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 05, 2022 at 10:17:01PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > > > > > On Friday 05 August 2022 11:54:53 Tom Rini wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 05, 2022 at 05:51:35PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Friday 05 August 2022 11:44:00 Tom Rini wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 05, 2022 at 05:12:59PM +0200, Pali Rohár > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday 05 August 2022 11:03:40 Tom Rini wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 05, 2022 at 04:59:35PM +0200, Pali Rohár > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday 05 August 2022 10:47:31 Tom Rini wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 05, 2022 at 04:21:24PM +0200, Pali > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rohár wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday 03 August 2022 12:13:18 Tom Rini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 06:00:13PM +0200, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday 02 August 2022 06:58:26 Tom Rini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 02, 2022 at 11:13:38AM +0200, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Tom! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your commit > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > de47ff536363289f92f85ed1e4901724d238432d > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ("Convert > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > CONFIG_SYS_MPC85XX_NO_RESETVEC to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kconfig") seems to be broken. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought I had managed to mirror the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > TPL/SPL/full usage that was there > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prior, but apparently some got missed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yea, conversion to Kconfig seems that was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > incorrect. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As the config files were just unclear, but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you seem to understand what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it's supposed to be, a patch to clean it up > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > would be most appreciated, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tom > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Broken is also commit > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > d433c74eecdce1e4952ef4e8c712a9289c0dfcc2. Seems > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that all kconfig migration changes done after > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that commit are broken. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I really do not have energy to investigate what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and how was broken due > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to incorrect kconfig migration. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did simple test. Applied following change: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/include/configs/p1_p2_rdb_pc.h > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b/include/configs/p1_p2_rdb_pc.h > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > index a6523753d5ca..489f24df0ab1 100644 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/include/configs/p1_p2_rdb_pc.h > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/include/configs/p1_p2_rdb_pc.h > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -624,3 +624,7 @@ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __stringify(__PCIE_RST_CMD)"\0" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "bootm $norbootaddr - $norfdtaddr" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > #endif /* __CONFIG_H */ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SDCARD > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +#error > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +#endif > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And then called: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > make CROSS_COMPILE=powerpc-linux-gnuspe- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P2020RDB-PC_defconfig u-boot.bin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And it failed, even when this defconfig file is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not SD card builds. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Where is PBL in that case even then? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P2020 (and older) are pre-PBL boards, they do not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > support NXP PBL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > header. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ah, OK, then it should just be removing > > > > > > > > > > > > > TARGET_P2020RDB from the choice > > > > > > > > > > > > > on "Freescale PBL load location". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tom > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I just do not understand. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P10** and P20** do not support NXP PBL. They support > > > > > > > > > > > > only pre-PBL and > > > > > > > > > > > > for SD card pre-PBL support I added option > > > > > > > > > > > > FSL_PREPBL_ESDHC_BOOT_SECTOR. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But CONFIG_SDCARD is automatically set when > > > > > > > > > > > > SYS_EXTRA_OPTIONS contains > > > > > > > > > > > > "SDCARD" string and CONFIG_SDCARD is used then also in > > > > > > > > > > > > P10** and P20** > > > > > > > > > > > > SD-card version of SPL to load proper U-Boot. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So CONFIG_SDCARD was over-loaded? That's very > > > > > > > > > > > frustrating. That's what > > > > > > > > > > > needs to be corrected then. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But it was correct, no? CONFIG_SDCARD ensures that U-Boot > > > > > > > > > > is compiled in > > > > > > > > > > mode in which can be booted from SD card. Or what do you > > > > > > > > > > have in mind as > > > > > > > > > > purpose of this symbol? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The issue is that your Kconfig migration changes enabled > > > > > > > > > > CONFIG_SDCARD > > > > > > > > > > also when building (parallel) NOR version of U-Boot. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To me, the biggest issue is that "CONFIG_SDCARD" exists. It's > > > > > > > > > very much > > > > > > > > > non-descriptive and that for some platforms it means "we have > > > > > > > > > NXP PBL" > > > > > > > > > and others means "we're booting from SDCARD". The former > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > renamed to be descriptive, and the latter should re-use > > > > > > > > > CONFIG_SD_CARD > > > > > > > > > which is still a bad name, but what everyone else uses, so > > > > > > > > > makes > > > > > > > > > renaming it later to something less bad easier. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I hope that you will do something with it. I already spent > > > > > > > > lot of > > > > > > > > time to fix and improve powerpc support, but the result is that > > > > > > > > my > > > > > > > > patches are on the list, mostly ignored; but changes which are > > > > > > > > breaking > > > > > > > > powerpc support are happily merging. In this state I'm loosing > > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > motivation to continue development as it is needed to do again > > > > > > > > to find > > > > > > > > out what new is broken. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm not planning to try and further fiddle with those symbols. A > > > > > > > simple revert is not possible as CONFIG_SYS_EXTRA_OPTIONS is > > > > > > > gone. I > > > > > > > assume that Marek will be picking up your PowerPC patches at this > > > > > > > point, > > > > > > > so any further work you're doing in that area shouldn't be > > > > > > > delayed. > > > > > > > I'll put re-examining this on my TODO list, but it's below > > > > > > > finishing my > > > > > > > CONFIG_SYS_* audit, and then renaming stuff to CFG_SYS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You should fix whatever platforms you have access to and ignore > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > rest, I feel likely to be removing most of them shortly at this > > > > > > > point. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I shall try to fix this on our platform by "reverting" these to > > > > > > different names, so that there are no new CONFIG_ macros. > > > > > > > > > > OK, thanks. I'll "fix" the corenet_ds platforms with a removal patch > > > > > soon, since they've been orphaned for a long while. > > > > > > > > Any progress on fixing this issue? Currently all this stuff is not > > > > working in u-boot master due to broken kconfig migration. And any > > > > continuation in kconfig migration just makes it worse and harder to fix > > > > later. > > > > > > I've removed the corenet_ds platforms now. > > > > I'm reminding this issue again. u-boot master branch is still broken. > > I don't really remember what the fix was at this point, but you should > fix whatever boards you have and care about as it's a matter of > selecting the correct option, yes?
See: https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20220805142124.6swsha6aj62f33e3@pali/ Broken is Kconfig migration which you done. I wrote in that email simple test case how to check if it is OK or not.