Hi Simon, On lun., juin 17, 2024 at 07:53, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote:
> Hi Mattijs, > > On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 at 04:13, Mattijs Korpershoek > <mkorpersh...@baylibre.com> wrote: >> >> Android boot flow is a bit different than a regular Linux distro. >> Android relies on multiple partitions in order to boot. >> >> A typical boot flow would be: >> 1. Parse the Bootloader Control Block (BCB, misc partition) >> 2. If BCB requested bootonce-bootloader, start fastboot and wait. >> 3. If BCB requested recovery or normal android, run the following: >> a. Get slot (A/B) from BCB >> b. Run AVB (Android Verified Boot) on boot partitions >> c. Load boot and vendor_boot partitions >> d. Load device-tree, ramdisk and boot >> >> The AOSP documentation has more details at [1], [2], [3] >> >> This has been implemented via complex boot scripts such as [4]. >> However, these boot script are neither very maintainable nor generic. >> Moreover, DISTRO_DEFAULTS is being deprecated [5]. >> >> Add a generic Android bootflow implementation for bootstd. >> >> For this initial version, only boot image v4 is supported. >> >> This has been tested on sandbox using: >> $ ./test/py/test.py --bd sandbox --build -k test_ut >> >> This has also been tested on the AM62X SK EVM using TI's Android SDK[6] >> To test on TI board, the following (WIP) patch is needed as well: >> https://gitlab.baylibre.com/baylibre/ti/ti-u-boot/-/commit/84cceb912bccd7cdd7f9dd69bca0e5d987a1fd04 >> >> [1] https://source.android.com/docs/core/architecture/bootloader >> [2] https://source.android.com/docs/core/architecture/partitions >> [3] https://source.android.com/docs/core/architecture/partitions/generic-boot >> [4] >> https://source.denx.de/u-boot/u-boot/-/blob/master/include/configs/meson64_android.h >> [5] https://lore.kernel.org/r/all/20230914165615.1058529-17-...@chromium.org/ >> [6] >> https://software-dl.ti.com/processor-sdk-android/esd/AM62X/09_02_00/docs/android/Overview.html >> >> Signed-off-by: Mattijs Korpershoek <mkorpersh...@baylibre.com> >> --- >> Changes in v2: >> - Dropped patch 2/6 boot: android: Add image_android_get_version() (Igor) >> - Fixed multi-line comment style (Igor, Simon) >> - Added dependency on CMD_FASTBOOT for BOOTMETH_ANDROID (Igor) >> - Fixed various resource leaks (Igor) >> - Fixed bootmeth_priv dangling pointer on error cases (Igor) >> - Updated test instructions in commit message for patch 6/6 >> - Added __weak impl of get_avendor_bootimg_addr() in patch 1 (dropped >> Igor's review because of this change) >> - Added extra info in Kconfig to detail MMC limitation (Simon) >> - Fixed typo Bootmethod->Bootmeth (Simon) >> - Documented android_priv structure (Simon) >> - Demoted various messages from printf() to log_debug (Simon) >> - Fixed some lines too long (Simon) >> - Added function documentation to read_slotted_partition() (Simon) >> - Added some doc about avb extra_args being modified (Simon) >> - Link to v1: >> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240606-bootmeth-android-v1-0-0c69d4457...@baylibre.com >> >> --- >> Mattijs Korpershoek (5): >> boot: android: Provide vendor_bootimg_addr in boot_get_fdt() >> bootstd: Add bootflow_iter_check_mmc() helper >> android: boot: Add set_abootimg_addr() and set_avendor_bootimg_addr() >> bootstd: Add a bootmeth for Android >> bootstd: Add test for bootmeth_android >> >> MAINTAINERS | 7 + >> arch/sandbox/dts/test.dts | 8 + >> boot/Kconfig | 16 ++ >> boot/Makefile | 2 + >> boot/bootflow.c | 12 + >> boot/bootmeth_android.c | 553 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> boot/bootmeth_android.h | 29 +++ >> boot/image-android.c | 5 + >> boot/image-fdt.c | 2 +- >> cmd/abootimg.c | 10 + >> configs/sandbox_defconfig | 2 +- >> doc/develop/bootstd.rst | 6 + >> include/bootflow.h | 9 + >> include/image.h | 14 ++ >> test/boot/bootflow.c | 65 +++++- >> test/py/tests/test_ut.py | 76 +++++++ >> 16 files changed, 811 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> --- >> base-commit: f9886bc60f42d5bcfcfa4e474af7dc230400b6be >> change-id: 20240605-bootmeth-android-bfc8596e9367 >> >> Best regards, >> -- >> Mattijs Korpershoek <mkorpersh...@baylibre.com> >> > > Thinking about this, I believe we should start having docs about the > individual bootmeths themselves. Yes. > > Can you add a section about your new bootmeth? I will come up with a > patch for the others that I know about. Perhaps > doc/develop/bootstd.rst would be a suitable place for now? Yes I can add a section. I would have preferred to have an example to work from there, but I can start writing docs as well. I'm leaving on vacation soon (without computer), so I'll be able to send a v3 with docs included in at earliest a 2-3 weeks from now. If you make a patch for the other bootmeths in the mean-time, please cc me so that I can help review and have an example for Android. Thanks! Mattijs > > Regards, > Simon
