Hi Moteen, On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 at 03:16, Moteen Shah <m-s...@ti.com> wrote: > > Hey Udit, > > The public documentation[0] has the required information which is > sufficient. The build instructions mentioned below are a subset of the > information present in [0] which should be faster in recreating the issue. > > [0] https://docs.u-boot.org/en/latest/board/ti/j7200_evm.html > > Regards, > Moteen > > On 16/04/25 13:47, Kumar, Udit wrote: > > Hello Moteen > > > > On 4/16/2025 1:23 PM, Moteen Shah wrote: > >> Hey Simon, > >> > >> I missed some essential build instructions I should have given to > >> you, apologies. > > > > I assume our u-boot public document should capture this information, > > > > It not, then please fix > > > > > >> > >> 1. Clone ti-linux-firmware: > >> https://git.ti.com/git/processor-firmware/ti-linux-firmware.git and > >> switch to ti-linux-firmware-next branch > >> 2. Clone U-Boot: https://github.com/Jamm02/U-Boot-patchwork > >> 3. Set variables : > >> $ export CC64=aarch64-linux-gnu- > >> $ export LNX_FW_PATH=path/to/ti-linux-firmware > >> $ export UBOOT_CFG_CORTEXA=j7200_evm_a72_defconfig > >> > >> 4. Inside U-Boot source: > >> $ touch bl31.bin > >> $ touch tee-raw.bin > >> $ make $UBOOT_CFG_CORTEXA > >> $ make CROSS_COMPILE=$CC64 BINMAN_INDIRS=$LNX_FW_PATH \ > >> BL31=bl31.bin \ > >> TEE=tee-raw.bin > >> > >> Let me know if this works.
Thanks for the info. Yes I was able to repeat this. But the problem seems to be that your tree is broken. When I try your patches against -master things seem to work OK. In your tree, even before your changes, 'binman test' fails. That is an indication that something is broken, so there isn't really any point in trying to add a new feature to that tree. Anyway, apart from that and the changing of the u-boot.dtb file, your implementation seems fine. I'll send a series with some suggestions to incorporate. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Moteen > >> > >> On 15/04/25 00:18, Simon Glass wrote: > >>> Hi Moteen, > >>> > >>> On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 at 05:39, Moteen Shah <m-s...@ti.com> wrote: > >>>> Hey Simon, > >>>> > >>>> Is the problem discussed in the thread an actual bug or am I missing > >>>> something in the implementation? > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> Moteen > >>>> > >>>> On 03/04/25 11:51, Moteen Shah wrote: > >>>>> Hey Simon, > >>>>> > >>>>> On 03/04/25 00:52, Simon Glass wrote: > >>>>>> Hi Moteen, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, 2 Apr 2025 at 22:01, Moteen Shah <m-s...@ti.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> Hey Simon, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 29/03/25 05:17, Simon Glass wrote: > >>>>>>>> Hi Moteen, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Thu, 27 Mar 2025 at 08:06, Moteen Shah <m-s...@ti.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> Add a function to scan through all the nodes in the device-tree > >>>>>>>>> recusively for bootph-* property. If found, propagate it to all > >>>>>>>>> of its parent nodes up the hierarchy. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Moteen Shah <m-s...@ti.com> > >>>>>>>>> --- > >>>>>>>>> [..] Regards, Simon
