On 2/3/25 10:50 PM, Manorit Chawdhry wrote:
Hi Andrew,

On 15:44-20250203, Andrew Davis wrote:
On 2/3/25 7:18 AM, Aniket Limaye via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote:
Update the filenames for tiboot3.bin variants built by the u-boot recipe
and also the files expected by the wic image.

So far am69-sk and j784s4-evm have shared the same binman include file
and hence the same filenames for u-boot images. However, with the
configs and the devicetree being different, the same built binary does
not support both boards. Hence the filenames of images built for am69-sk
should reflect support for the same. The corresponding

This is not correct. The SK and EVM use different defconfigs, there is
no issue with two different builds producing output with the same filename.
All builds produce a u-boot.img for example, no issue here.


I would argue that u-boot.img doesn't contain the name based on
defconfigs, tiboot3 however contains the name of the binary generated so

tiboot3 does not contain the name based on defconfigs either, it is
based on the SYSFW blob contained. It is important we know which
SYSFW was used. The defconfig used is not important as you can only
build one defconfig at a time, you only get one set of output binaries
per build.

it's just confusing and nothing else. tiboot3.bin would anyways be a
symlink to the correct one but the other binary names should be based on
defconfig IMO. Have replied upstream to your comment as well.

There is no "correct one", the symlink just points to a common default.
But folks are free to pick a different one based on their hardware.

This is already the naming standard used here in Yocto, Debian, and
probably other places. Changing it now to "avoid confusion" just causes
more confusion.

I've replied upstream also.

Andrew


Regards
Manorit

I've root caused the real issue, looks like a simple mistake in naming
was made in the patch taken in our  U-Boot evil vendor tree. The same
patch was posted upstream also, which I've commented[0] on. So the
correct name will go in upstream, and a fix backported to our tree.

That means this patch will not be needed.

Andrew

[0] https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/[email protected]/


This change is currently only applicable to ti-u-boot-2025.01, and hence
it is restricted to the override bsp-ti-6_12.

Signed-off-by: Aniket Limaye <[email protected]>
---
This patch needs to be merged in sync with the corresponding patch for
ti-u-boot-2025.01.

The u-boot patch has also been posted to upstream u-boot and when merged
there, the next/upstream BSP packages will also need this change.
https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/[email protected]/
---
   meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/am69-sk-k3r5.conf | 2 ++
   meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/am69.inc  | 7 ++++---
   2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/am69-sk-k3r5.conf 
b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/am69-sk-k3r5.conf
index 9d2b4cd6..376d8153 100644
--- a/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/am69-sk-k3r5.conf
+++ b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/am69-sk-k3r5.conf
@@ -5,7 +5,9 @@
   require conf/machine/include/k3r5.inc
   SYSFW_SOC = "j784s4"
+SYSFW_SOC:bsp-ti-6_12 = "am69"
   SYSFW_CONFIG = "evm"
+SYSFW_CONFIG:bsp-ti-6_12 = "sk"
   SYSFW_SUFFIX = "hs-fs"
   UBOOT_MACHINE = "am69_sk_r5_defconfig"
diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/am69.inc 
b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/am69.inc
index da8a5a8b..e82d58e2 100644
--- a/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/am69.inc
+++ b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/am69.inc
@@ -9,10 +9,11 @@ require conf/machine/include/mesa-pvr.inc
   PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/gpudriver ?= "${BSP_ROGUE_DRIVER_PROVIDER}"
   # Default tiboot3.bin on AM69 is for SR1.0 HS-FS
-IMAGE_BOOT_FILES += "tiboot3-j784s4-hs-fs-evm.bin"
+# Add tiboot3.bin for all SOC types, to the wic image.
+BSP_BOOTLOADER_FILES = "tiboot3-j784s4-hs-fs-evm.bin tiboot3-j784s4-hs-evm.bin"
+BSP_BOOTLOADER_FILES:bsp-ti-6_12 = "tiboot3-am69-hs-fs-sk.bin 
tiboot3-am69-hs-sk.bin"
-# Since default tiboot3.bin on AM69 is for HS-FS, add a version for SR1.0 HS-SE
-IMAGE_BOOT_FILES += "tiboot3-j784s4-hs-evm.bin"
+IMAGE_BOOT_FILES += "${BSP_BOOTLOADER_FILES}"
   TFA_BOARD = "j784s4"





-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#18260): 
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/message/18260
Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/110970137/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/unsub 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to