Re: [meta-xilinx] ZCU102 boot issue

[Mike Looijmans]

On 07-03-19 21:54, Manjukumar Harthikote Matha wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: meta-xilinx-boun...@yoctoproject.org [mailto:meta-xilinx-
>> boun...@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Mike Looijmans
>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2019 12:19 AM
>> To: meta-xilinx@yoctoproject.org
>> Subject: Re: [meta-xilinx] ZCU102 boot issue
>>
>> On 30-01-19 14:13, Jean-Francois Dagenais wrote:
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>>> On Jan 28, 2019, at 14:39, Manjukumar Harthikote Matha
>>>> mailto:manju...@xilinx.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Alex,
>>>> You need additional patches on pmu-firmware
>>>> See:https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/meta-xilinx/2019-January
>>>> /004198.html
>>>
>>> Manju, thanks for your patience and diligence in answering this yet another 
>>> time.
>>>
>>> In my experience, when such an issue is raised again and again, it
>>> means it will not go away and it costs a lot in loss of time, money
>>> and most importantly, spirit ;)
>>>
>>> I know it's been discussed before too but if I may add my 2 cents: Am
>>> I missing something or without manually patching pmu-firmware, the
>>> boards in the meta-xilinx-bsp will not function because of the missing
>>> config object? (I still use meta-xilinx-tools so I actually don't
>>> know.)  Doesn't this mean Xilinx doesn't fully support the open-source
>>> workflow? Or is just the word "support" that should be replaced with
>>> "participates"? (In which case it is indeed directly responsible for
>>> it)
>>>
>>> I remember problems with the licensing, but there has to be a
>>> solution. Even if not elegant, once automated in yocto recipes, it's
>>> better than nothing and a broken board after 5 hours of building!
>>>
>>> And if this is still not possible, to help people find the very
>>> un-obvious source of their issues, perhaps PMU firmware could suffix
>>> "(no cfg obj)" to its version? Or anything else printed early which
>>> will help people find a xilinx wiki page explaining the problem and the 
>>> solutions
>> available.
>>>
>>
>> Simplest solution here would be to just integrate that "default config" 
>> patch into the
>> standard PMU firmware and then all boards will just boot. It won't prevent 
>> the FSBL
>> changing the config, so that flow isn't affected negatively.
>>
> 
> Please do send a patch if you have for pmu-firmware "default config". We will 
> take a look at having them integrated.

It's where it's always been:

https://github.com/topic-embedded-products/meta-topic/tree/master/recipes-bsp/pmu-firmware/pmu-firmware

-- 
___
meta-xilinx mailing list
meta-xilinx@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-xilinx

Re: [meta-xilinx] ZCU102 boot issue

[Manjukumar Harthikote Matha]

Hi Mike,

> -Original Message-
> From: meta-xilinx-boun...@yoctoproject.org [mailto:meta-xilinx-
> boun...@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Mike Looijmans
> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2019 12:19 AM
> To: meta-xilinx@yoctoproject.org
> Subject: Re: [meta-xilinx] ZCU102 boot issue
> 
> On 30-01-19 14:13, Jean-Francois Dagenais wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> >> On Jan 28, 2019, at 14:39, Manjukumar Harthikote Matha
> >> mailto:manju...@xilinx.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Alex,
> >> You need additional patches on pmu-firmware
> >> See:https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/meta-xilinx/2019-January
> >> /004198.html
> >
> > Manju, thanks for your patience and diligence in answering this yet another 
> > time.
> >
> > In my experience, when such an issue is raised again and again, it
> > means it will not go away and it costs a lot in loss of time, money
> > and most importantly, spirit ;)
> >
> > I know it's been discussed before too but if I may add my 2 cents: Am
> > I missing something or without manually patching pmu-firmware, the
> > boards in the meta-xilinx-bsp will not function because of the missing
> > config object? (I still use meta-xilinx-tools so I actually don't
> > know.)  Doesn't this mean Xilinx doesn't fully support the open-source
> > workflow? Or is just the word "support" that should be replaced with
> > "participates"? (In which case it is indeed directly responsible for
> > it)
> >
> > I remember problems with the licensing, but there has to be a
> > solution. Even if not elegant, once automated in yocto recipes, it's
> > better than nothing and a broken board after 5 hours of building!
> >
> > And if this is still not possible, to help people find the very
> > un-obvious source of their issues, perhaps PMU firmware could suffix
> > "(no cfg obj)" to its version? Or anything else printed early which
> > will help people find a xilinx wiki page explaining the problem and the 
> > solutions
> available.
> >
> 
> Simplest solution here would be to just integrate that "default config" patch 
> into the
> standard PMU firmware and then all boards will just boot. It won't prevent 
> the FSBL
> changing the config, so that flow isn't affected negatively.
> 

Please do send a patch if you have for pmu-firmware "default config". We will 
take a look at having them integrated.

> If licensing of my patch is an issue, I'm happy to change the license from 
> GPL into
> whatever Xilinx needs it to be to be able to integrate it.

Thanks,
Manju
-- 
___
meta-xilinx mailing list
meta-xilinx@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-xilinx

Re: [meta-xilinx] ZCU102 boot issue

[Scott Ellis]

I agree.

Much better then everyone that uses the pmu-firmware having to maintain
these same patches in their own custom layer to get a working system.

It would be nicer if the actual pmu_cfg_obj.c was not a patch, but just
a file in pmu-firmware/files that the recipe copied to the build dir
before the compilation task.

Easier to replace in custom layer that way.

The pm_binding.c modification would still be a patch.


-- 
___
meta-xilinx mailing list
meta-xilinx@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-xilinx

Re: [meta-xilinx] ZCU102 boot issue

[Mike Looijmans]

On 30-01-19 14:13, Jean-Francois Dagenais wrote:
> Hi guys,
> 
>> On Jan 28, 2019, at 14:39, Manjukumar Harthikote Matha > > wrote:
>>
>> Hi Alex,
>> You need additional patches on pmu-firmware
>> See:https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/meta-xilinx/2019-January/004198.html
> 
> Manju, thanks for your patience and diligence in answering this yet another 
> time.
> 
> In my experience, when such an issue is raised again and again, it means it 
> will not go away and it costs a lot in loss of time, money and most 
> importantly, spirit ;)
> 
> I know it's been discussed before too but if I may add my 2 cents: Am I 
> missing something or without manually patching pmu-firmware, the boards in 
> the 
> meta-xilinx-bsp will not function because of the missing config object? (I 
> still use meta-xilinx-tools so I actually don't know.)  Doesn't this mean 
> Xilinx doesn't fully support the open-source workflow? Or is just the word 
> "support" that should be replaced with "participates"? (In which case it is 
> indeed directly responsible for it)
> 
> I remember problems with the licensing, but there has to be a solution. Even 
> if not elegant, once automated in yocto recipes, it's better than nothing and 
> a broken board after 5 hours of building!
> 
> And if this is still not possible, to help people find the very un-obvious 
> source of their issues, perhaps PMU firmware could suffix "(no cfg obj)" to 
> its version? Or anything else printed early which will help people find a 
> xilinx wiki page explaining the problem and the solutions available.
> 

Simplest solution here would be to just integrate that "default config" patch 
into the standard PMU firmware and then all boards will just boot. It won't 
prevent the FSBL changing the config, so that flow isn't affected negatively.

If licensing of my patch is an issue, I'm happy to change the license from
GPL into whatever Xilinx needs it to be to be able to integrate it.

Mike.
-- 
___
meta-xilinx mailing list
meta-xilinx@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-xilinx

Re: [meta-xilinx] ZCU102 boot issue

[Jean-Francois Dagenais]

Hi guys,

> On Jan 28, 2019, at 14:39, Manjukumar Harthikote Matha  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Alex,
>  
> You need additional patches on pmu-firmware
> See: 
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/meta-xilinx/2019-January/004198.html 
> 

Manju, thanks for your patience and diligence in answering this yet another 
time.

In my experience, when such an issue is raised again and again, it means it 
will not go away and it costs a lot in loss of time, money and most 
importantly, spirit ;)

I know it's been discussed before too but if I may add my 2 cents: Am I missing 
something or without manually patching pmu-firmware, the boards in the 
meta-xilinx-bsp will not function because of the missing config object? (I 
still use meta-xilinx-tools so I actually don't know.)  Doesn't this mean 
Xilinx doesn't fully support the open-source workflow? Or is just the word 
"support" that should be replaced with "participates"? (In which case it is 
indeed directly responsible for it)

I remember problems with the licensing, but there has to be a solution. Even if 
not elegant, once automated in yocto recipes, it's better than nothing and a 
broken board after 5 hours of building!

And if this is still not possible, to help people find the very un-obvious 
source of their issues, perhaps PMU firmware could suffix "(no cfg obj)" to its 
version? Or anything else printed early which will help people find a xilinx 
wiki page explaining the problem and the solutions available.

Cheers all!-- 
___
meta-xilinx mailing list
meta-xilinx@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-xilinx

Re: [meta-xilinx] ZCU102 boot issue

[Manjukumar Harthikote Matha]

Hi Alex,

You need additional patches on pmu-firmware
See: 
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/meta-xilinx/2019-January/004198.html

Thanks,
Manju

From: meta-xilinx-boun...@yoctoproject.org 
[mailto:meta-xilinx-boun...@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Kerner
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 10:56 AM
To: meta-xilinx@yoctoproject.org
Subject: [meta-xilinx] ZCU102 boot issue

Hello,

I've got a ZCU102 rev 1.1 board and I'm trying to build yocto using this howto: 
https://github.com/Xilinx/meta-xilinx/blob/master/meta-xilinx-bsp/README.building.md

There is following error while booting:

U-Boot SPL 2018.01 (Jan 25 2019 - 21:16:27)
EL Level:   EL3
Trying to boot from MMC1
reading u-boot.bin
reading atf-uboot.ub
reading atf-uboot.ub
NOTICE:  ATF running on XCZU9EG/silicon v4/RTL5.1 at 0xfffea000
NOTICE:  BL31: Secure code at 0x0
NOTICE:  BL31: Non secure code at 0x800
NOTICE:  BL31: v1.5(release):xilinx-v2018.3
NOTICE:  BL31: Built : 21:23:57, Jan 25 2019
PMUFW:  v1.1
zynqmp_clk_get_peripheral_rate mio read fail
failed to get rate
zynqmp_clk_get_peripheral_rate mio read fail
failed to get rate

I also tried to boot pre-build petalinux 2018.2 image and it worked fine.

Here is my build configuration:

BB_VERSION   = "1.40.0"
BUILD_SYS= "x86_64-linux"
NATIVELSBSTRING  = "universal"
TARGET_SYS   = "aarch64-poky-linux"
MACHINE  = "zcu102-zynqmp"
DISTRO   = "poky"
DISTRO_VERSION   = "2.6.1"
TUNE_FEATURES= "aarch64"
TARGET_FPU   = ""
meta
meta-poky
meta-yocto-bsp   = "thud:cc73390a75d98b96eb861ae0624283c1ea6ef1bd"
meta-xilinx-bsp
meta-xilinx-standalone
meta-xilinx-contrib  = "thud:c42016e2e6ca13e133fdb877785ec8aa2bd82f16"

Build Configuration:
BB_VERSION   = "1.40.0"
BUILD_SYS= "x86_64-linux"
NATIVELSBSTRING  = "universal"
TARGET_SYS   = "aarch64-poky-linux"
MACHINE  = "zcu102-zynqmp"
DISTRO   = "poky"
DISTRO_VERSION   = "2.6.1"
TUNE_FEATURES= "aarch64"
TARGET_FPU   = ""
meta
meta-poky
meta-yocto-bsp   = "thud:cc73390a75d98b96eb861ae0624283c1ea6ef1bd"
meta-xilinx-bsp
meta-xilinx-standalone
meta-xilinx-contrib  = "thud:c42016e2e6ca13e133fdb877785ec8aa2bd82f16"

Build Configuration:
BB_VERSION   = "1.40.0"
BUILD_SYS= "x86_64-linux"
NATIVELSBSTRING  = "universal"
TARGET_SYS   = "microblazeel-xilinx-elf"
MACHINE  = "zynqmp-pmu"
DISTRO   = "xilinx-standalone"
DISTRO_VERSION   = "1.0"
TUNE_FEATURES= "microblaze v9.2 barrel-shift pattern-compare"
TARGET_FPU   = "fpu-soft"
meta
meta-poky
meta-yocto-bsp   = "thud:cc73390a75d98b96eb861ae0624283c1ea6ef1bd"
meta-xilinx-bsp
meta-xilinx-standalone
meta-xilinx-contrib  = "thud:c42016e2e6ca13e133fdb877785ec8aa2bd82f16"

Kind regards
Alex
-- 
___
meta-xilinx mailing list
meta-xilinx@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-xilinx

Re: [meta-xilinx] ZCU102 boot issue

[Scott Ellis]

This is the error you get if the PMU does not get a config object on boot.

When using a boot.bin object from the xilinx tools, the first stage
bootloader is Xilinx's FSBL which loads a config object into the PMU at
startup before it loads u-boot proper.

When you use the instructions in the README, the first stage boot loader
is u-boot's SPL, which does not know how to load a config object into
the PMU.

The config object I am talking about is the C file pmu_cfg_obj.c

The workaround is to patch the pmu-firmware (it's a simple two line
patch) to teach the PMU firmware to load a built-in config object.
And then you need to include the pmu_cfg_obj.c in the source. So the
pmu-firmware recipe needs two patches, but both are trivial.

There are multiple threads on the mailing list about this.

Here is a recent one that I initiated asking the same question as you in
a different way

https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/meta-xilinx/2019-January/004193.html

-- 
___
meta-xilinx mailing list
meta-xilinx@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-xilinx