On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 at 08:14, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 08:01:22AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Tom, > > > > On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 at 14:40, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 07:32:17AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > QEMU always gets its devicetree from the OF_BOARD mechanism so we should > > > > not depend on !BLOBLIST here. > > > > > > > > The logic of PRIOR_STAGE is quite a mess, unfortuantely. We should rely > > > > only standard passage to receive things from the prior stage. QEMU > > > > should implement standard passage to provide its devicetree to U-Boot > > > > However Linaro has blocked my patch to provide devicetree additions[1], > > > > so little breath should be held in respect of either change. > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/20210926183410.256484-1-...@chromium.org/ > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > > > > Fixes: 2b71470628c dts: OF_HAS_PRIOR_STAGE should depend on !BLOBLIST > > > > --- > > > > > > > > (no changes since v1) > > > > > > > > dts/Kconfig | 2 +- > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/dts/Kconfig b/dts/Kconfig > > > > index 41a758e83a6..fc25a854708 100644 > > > > --- a/dts/Kconfig > > > > +++ b/dts/Kconfig > > > > @@ -191,7 +191,7 @@ config OF_BOARD > > > > > > > > config OF_HAS_PRIOR_STAGE > > > > bool > > > > - depends on !BLOBLIST > > > > + depends on !BLOBLIST || ARCH_QEMU > > > > help > > > > Indicates that a prior stage of the firmware (before U-Boot > > > > proper) > > > > makes use of device tree and this board normally boots with > > > > that prior > > > > > > Since OF_HAS_PRIOR_STAGE has no prompt, it shouldn't have a depends line > > > either really. I believe 2b71470628c is part of an attempt to say that > > > if you have bloblist enabled then that's how the previous loader needs > > > to pass the device tree. But indeed that's not quite how to enforce that > > > kind of demand, so we should just drop the restriction here (and some > > > other time fix the "imply OF_HAS_PRIOR_STAGE" to be "select > > > OF_HAS_PRIOR_STAGE" because it's not prompted, imply is the wrong > > > keyword. > > > > So, just drop the 'depends' line? > > Correct.
OK > > > I don't understand all this prior-stage stuff and I believe it is the > > Wrong Direction. We should just say where the DT comes from. > > Yes, but we're all keen to not rehash years worth of discussion here > either. Indeed. Regards, SImon
