mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel@emagii.com, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: Copying Device Tree File into reserved area of VMLINUX before deployment
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2017 23:32:24 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <fe7925f3-30d4-ec03-a6c5-61a8644dcdfe@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a0f9d598-04af-fddd-58ad-09db10ec19da@gmail.com>

Hi Ulf,


On 11/19/17 23:23, Frank Rowand wrote:
> adding devicetree list, devicetree maintainers
> 
> On 11/18/17 12:59, Ulf Samuelsson wrote:
>> I noticed when checking out the OpenWRT support for the board that they have a method to avoid having to pass the device tree address to the kernel, and can thus boot device tree based kernels with U-boots that
>> does not support device trees.
>>
>> Is this something that would be considered useful for including in mainstream:
>>
>> BACKGROUND:
>> Trying to load a yocto kernel into a MIPS target (MT7620A based),
>> and the U-Boot is more than stupid.
>> Does not support the "run" command as an example.
>> They modified the U-Boot MAGIC Word to complicate things.
>> The U-Boot is not configured to use device tree files.
>> The board runs a 2.6 kernel right now.
>>
>> Several attempts by me a and others to rebuild U-Boot according to
>> the H/W vendors source code and build instructions results in a
>> bricked unit. Bricked units cannot be recovered.

Hopefully you have brought this to the attention of the vendor.  U-Boot
is GPL v2 (or in some ways possibly GPL v2 or later), so if you can not
build U-Boot that is equivalent to the binary U-Boot they shipped, the
vendor may want to ensure that they are shipping the proper source and
build instructions.


>> Not my choice of H/W, so I cannot change it.
>>
>>
>> ===================================================================
>> OPENWRT:
>> I noticed when checking out the OpenWRT support for the board that
>> they have a method to avoid having to pass the device tree address
>> to the kernel, and can thus boot device tree based kernels with
>> U-boots that does not support device trees.
>> 
>> What they do is to reserve 16 kB of kernel space, and tag it with
>> an ASCII string "OWRTDTB:". After the kernel and dtb is built, a
>> utility "patch-dtb" will update the vmlinux binary, copying in the
>> device tree file.
>>
>> ===================================================================
>> It would be useful to me, and I could of course patch the
>> mainstream kernel, but first I would like to check if this is of
>> interest for mainstream.

Not in this form.  Hard coding a fixed size area in the boot image
to contain the FDT (aka DTB) is a non-starter.

And again, I would first approach the H/W vendor before trying to
come up with a work around like this.


>> I envisage the support would look something like:
>>
>> ============
>> Kconfig.
>> config MIPS
>>     select    HAVE_IMAGE_DTB
>>
>> config    HAVE_IMAGE_DTB
>>     bool
>>
>> if HAVE_IMAGE_DTB
>> config     IMAGE_DTB
>>     bool    "Allocated space for DTB within image
>>
>> config    DTB_SIZE
>>     int    "DTB space (kB)
>>
>> config    DTB_TAG
>>     string    "DTB space tag"
>>     default    "OWRTDTB:"
>> endif
>>
>> ============
>> Some Makefile
>> obj-$(CONFIG_INCLUDE_DTB) += image_dtb.o
>>
>> ============
>> image_dtb.S:
>>     .text
>>     .align    5
>>     .ascii    CONFIG_DTB_TAG
>>     EXPORT(__image_dtb)
>>     .fill    DTB_SIZE * 1024
>>
>> ===================
>> arch/mips/xxx/of.c:
>>
>> #if    defined(CONFIG_IMAGE_DTB)
>>     if (<conditions to boot from dtb_space>)
>>         __dt_setup_arch(__dtb_start);
>>     else
>>         __dt_setup_arch(&__image_dtb);
>> #else
>>     __dt_setup_arch(__dtb_start);
>> #endif
>>
>> I imagine that if the support is enabled for a target, it should
>> be possible to override it with a CMDLINE argument
>>     
>>     
>> They do something similar for the CMDLINE; copying it into the vmlinux, to allow a smaller boot

  reply	other threads:[~2017-11-20  4:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-11-18 17:59 Ulf Samuelsson
2017-11-20  4:23 ` Frank Rowand
2017-11-20  4:32   ` Frank Rowand [this message]
2017-11-20 20:19     ` Ulf Samuelsson
2017-11-20 21:39       ` Frank Rowand
2017-11-20 23:09         ` Ulf Samuelsson
2017-11-21  6:19           ` Ulf Samuelsson
2017-11-21 12:02             ` Ulf Samuelsson
2017-11-21 17:09         ` Rob Herring
2017-11-21 20:03           ` Ulf Samuelsson
2017-11-20 11:44   ` Mark Rutland
2017-11-20 16:38     ` Frank Rowand

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=fe7925f3-30d4-ec03-a6c5-61a8644dcdfe@gmail.com \
    --to=frowand.list@gmail.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@emagii.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome