On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 06:46:55PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 6:32 PM Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 12:53:32AM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
> >
> > > Usually, the associated board would supply spl boot device
> > > using spl_boot_device() but some boards have board driver
> > > that are possible to supply boot device via board_get_int
> > > with BOARD_SPL_BOOT_DEVICE id.
> > >
> > > This patch add support for those.
> > >
> > > Cc: Mario Six <mario....@gdsys.cc>
> > > Cc: Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com>
> > > Cc: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>
> > > Cc: Jean-Jacques Hiblot <jjhib...@ti.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <ja...@amarulasolutions.com>
> > > ---
> > > Changes for v2:
> > > - new patch
> > >
> > > common/spl/spl.c | 14 +++++++++++++-
> > > include/board.h | 9 +++++++++
> > > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/common/spl/spl.c b/common/spl/spl.c
> > > index fc5cbbbeba..a07b71b3c1 100644
> > > --- a/common/spl/spl.c
> > > +++ b/common/spl/spl.c
> > > @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
> > > #include <common.h>
> > > #include <bloblist.h>
> > > #include <binman_sym.h>
> > > +#include <board.h>
> > > #include <dm.h>
> > > #include <handoff.h>
> > > #include <hang.h>
> > > @@ -483,9 +484,20 @@ int spl_init(void)
> > > #define BOOT_DEVICE_NONE 0xdeadbeef
> > > #endif
> > >
> > > +__weak u32 spl_boot_device(void)
> > > +{
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > __weak void board_boot_order(u32 *spl_boot_list)
> > > {
> > > - spl_boot_list[0] = spl_boot_device();
> > > + struct udevice *board;
> > > +
> > > + if (!board_get(&board))
> > > + board_get_int(board, BOARD_SPL_BOOT_DEVICE,
> > > + (int *)&spl_boot_list[0]);
> > > + else
> > > + spl_boot_list[0] = spl_boot_device();
> > > }
> > >
> > > static struct spl_image_loader *spl_ll_find_loader(uint boot_device)
> > > diff --git a/include/board.h b/include/board.h
> > > index 678b652b0a..ce4eaba38d 100644
> > > --- a/include/board.h
> > > +++ b/include/board.h
> > > @@ -211,3 +211,12 @@ static inline int board_get_fit_loadable(struct
> > > udevice *dev, int index,
> > > }
> > >
> > > #endif
> > > +
> > > +/**
> > > + * Common board unique identifier
> > > + *
> > > + * @BOARD_SPL_BOOT_DEVICE: id to get SPL boot device.
> > > + */
> > > +enum common_ids {
> > > + BOARD_SPL_BOOT_DEVICE,
> > > +};
> >
> > I don't understand why we need this abstraction. The intention of what
> > we have today is that the generic SPL framework calls out to something
> > to ask "what are we booted from?". Why can the board driver not just
> > supply that information? Thanks!
>
> Yes, we can update boot-device on respective areas by probing board
> driver and assign spl_boot_list[0] by explicitly define
> spl_boot_device function, but this change bypass all these codes. Just
> like how we did on SPL fit to load the concerned image via board
> driver.I still don't get it, sorry. Why is spl_boot_device() not provided by the "board" driver to say what to boot in this case? -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
