Re: Running u-boot 2021.04 on Raspberry Pi 4
On 09/04/2021 20:06, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 3:15 AM Matthias Brugger wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 09/04/2021 10:14, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote:
>>> [ Adding Matthias for the SMBIOS part ]
>>>
>>> On Fri, 2021-04-09 at 00:00 -0700, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 8:59 PM Sean Anderson wrote:
> On 4/8/21 8:18 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> first time poster, long time lurker here. Over at Project EVE
>> https://github.com/lf-edge/eve I've been trying to migrate
>> from our current u-boot v2020.07 + patches:
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/lf-edge/eve/tree/master/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2020.07
>> to the latest u-boot 2021.04.
>>
>> Great news is that most of the patches we dependent
>> on seem to have been pulled upstream. However, this
>> single *chunk* of one patchset wasn't:
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/lf-edge/eve/blob/master/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2020.07/0001-usb-xhci-Load-Raspberry-Pi-4-VL805-s-firmware.patch#L293
>>
>> I'm wondering what was the reason for leaving it behind,
>
> +CC Nicolas
>
>> - Get rid of PCI core patch as not needed with correct DT PCI
>> topology
>
> also from the cover letter
>
>> This also depends on a DT/bindings patch available on the
>> linux-mailing lists:
>> https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@.../msg2205783.html
>
> The merged version of this series is
>
>
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-usb/list/?series=310015=%2A=both
>
>> Here is the relevant bit for reference/discussion:
>>
>> {
>> pci@1,0 {
>> #address-cells = <3>;
>> #size-cells = <2>;
>> ranges;
>>
>> reg = <0 0 0 0 0>;
>>
>> usb@1,0 {
>> reg = <0x1 0 0 0 0>;
>> resets = <
>> RASPBERRYPI_FIRMWARE_RESET_ID_USB>;
>> };
>> };
>> };
>
>>>
>>> Yes, instead of using a PCI quirk we settled on a reset controller. All
>> in all
>>> it is less hacky. But needs changes in DT.
>>>
Aha! Thank you so much -- this is super helpful!
>> since without it I don't seem to have functioning USB
>> devices on my Raspberry Pi 4. In fact, adding it back:
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/rvs/eve/tree/u-boot/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2021.04
>> (just that one chunk -- 'cuz the reset got upstreamed)
>> seems to solve the issue for me.
>>
>> Another question I have is that the new u-boot seems to have
>> some kind of a regression that I can't quite debug. The SMBIOS
>> tables that it constructs during EFI boot sequence seem to be
>> broken (see the dmidecode output below). Again, this seems
>> to be a regression compared to v2020.07. Any ideas on what
>> could be wrong or how can I start debugging it would be
>
>>
>> Yes, that's not working right now. I'm working on a fix for the tables:
>>
>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20210406090435.19357-1-matthias@kernel.org/
>>
>> This will fix the error en dmidecode but the tables will be basically
>> empty.
>> Before that there was some information that helped you to identify that
>> you are
>> running on a RaspberryPi.
>>
>> A quick fix would be to add that information to the DTS. Like for example
>> done here:
>>
>> https://source.denx.de/u-boot/u-boot/-/blob/master/arch/arm/dts/rk3328-rock64-u-boot.dtsi#L13
>
>
> Thanks! Works like a charm:
>
> https://github.com/lf-edge/eve/blob/master/pkg/u-boot/rpi/overlays/raspberrypi-rpi.dts
>
> But yes -- it would be nice to fix the default behaviour. Speaking of
> tables being empty
> (once your fix above makes it in) it may also make sense to document it
> someplace,
> but I honestly don't know what a good place for that would be ;-)
>
I send patches for the case where U-Boot relies on the embedded device tree, not
sure if that's your case:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/user/todo/uboot/?series=238321
Feel free to test and provide feedback :)
>
>> On the long run we want to add a sysinfo driver to read the information
>> for the
>> mailbox driver and use that. But my understanding is that for that we
>> would need
>> to create a SPL for the mailbox driver to provide that info in a shared
>> data
>> structure. It's still on my list for investigation.
>>
>
> That sounds pretty useful too -- although my usecase is much more limited
> -- I just
> need to be able to provide quick DT overlays to reliably identify various
> HATs on RPi
> at the SMBIOS level.
>
> Where it gets interesting, of course, are the HATs that provide their OWN
> DTs via
> EEPROM I2C.
>
Well if we go with the smbios overlay it could add information to that in the
Re: Running u-boot 2021.04 on Raspberry Pi 4
On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 3:15 AM Matthias Brugger wrote:
>
>
> On 09/04/2021 10:14, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote:
> > [ Adding Matthias for the SMBIOS part ]
> >
> > On Fri, 2021-04-09 at 00:00 -0700, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> >> On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 8:59 PM Sean Anderson wrote:
> >>> On 4/8/21 8:18 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> Hi!
>
> first time poster, long time lurker here. Over at Project EVE
> https://github.com/lf-edge/eve I've been trying to migrate
> from our current u-boot v2020.07 + patches:
>
>
> https://github.com/lf-edge/eve/tree/master/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2020.07
> to the latest u-boot 2021.04.
>
> Great news is that most of the patches we dependent
> on seem to have been pulled upstream. However, this
> single *chunk* of one patchset wasn't:
>
>
> https://github.com/lf-edge/eve/blob/master/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2020.07/0001-usb-xhci-Load-Raspberry-Pi-4-VL805-s-firmware.patch#L293
>
> I'm wondering what was the reason for leaving it behind,
> >>>
> >>> +CC Nicolas
> >>>
> - Get rid of PCI core patch as not needed with correct DT PCI
> topology
> >>>
> >>> also from the cover letter
> >>>
> This also depends on a DT/bindings patch available on the
> linux-mailing lists:
> https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@.../msg2205783.html
> >>>
> >>> The merged version of this series is
> >>>
> >>>
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-usb/list/?series=310015=%2A=both
> >>>
> Here is the relevant bit for reference/discussion:
>
> {
> pci@1,0 {
> #address-cells = <3>;
> #size-cells = <2>;
> ranges;
>
> reg = <0 0 0 0 0>;
>
> usb@1,0 {
> reg = <0x1 0 0 0 0>;
> resets = <
> RASPBERRYPI_FIRMWARE_RESET_ID_USB>;
> };
> };
> };
> >>>
> >
> > Yes, instead of using a PCI quirk we settled on a reset controller. All
> in all
> > it is less hacky. But needs changes in DT.
> >
> >> Aha! Thank you so much -- this is super helpful!
> >>
> since without it I don't seem to have functioning USB
> devices on my Raspberry Pi 4. In fact, adding it back:
>
>
> https://github.com/rvs/eve/tree/u-boot/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2021.04
> (just that one chunk -- 'cuz the reset got upstreamed)
> seems to solve the issue for me.
>
> Another question I have is that the new u-boot seems to have
> some kind of a regression that I can't quite debug. The SMBIOS
> tables that it constructs during EFI boot sequence seem to be
> broken (see the dmidecode output below). Again, this seems
> to be a regression compared to v2020.07. Any ideas on what
> could be wrong or how can I start debugging it would be
> >>>
>
> Yes, that's not working right now. I'm working on a fix for the tables:
>
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20210406090435.19357-1-matthias@kernel.org/
>
> This will fix the error en dmidecode but the tables will be basically
> empty.
> Before that there was some information that helped you to identify that
> you are
> running on a RaspberryPi.
>
> A quick fix would be to add that information to the DTS. Like for example
> done here:
>
> https://source.denx.de/u-boot/u-boot/-/blob/master/arch/arm/dts/rk3328-rock64-u-boot.dtsi#L13
Thanks! Works like a charm:
https://github.com/lf-edge/eve/blob/master/pkg/u-boot/rpi/overlays/raspberrypi-rpi.dts
But yes -- it would be nice to fix the default behaviour. Speaking of
tables being empty
(once your fix above makes it in) it may also make sense to document it
someplace,
but I honestly don't know what a good place for that would be ;-)
> On the long run we want to add a sysinfo driver to read the information
> for the
> mailbox driver and use that. But my understanding is that for that we
> would need
> to create a SPL for the mailbox driver to provide that info in a shared
> data
> structure. It's still on my list for investigation.
>
That sounds pretty useful too -- although my usecase is much more limited
-- I just
need to be able to provide quick DT overlays to reliably identify various
HATs on RPi
at the SMBIOS level.
Where it gets interesting, of course, are the HATs that provide their OWN
DTs via
EEPROM I2C.
Thanks,
Roman.
Re: Running u-boot 2021.04 on Raspberry Pi 4
On 09/04/2021 10:14, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote:
> [ Adding Matthias for the SMBIOS part ]
>
> On Fri, 2021-04-09 at 00:00 -0700, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 8:59 PM Sean Anderson wrote:
>>> On 4/8/21 8:18 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
Hi!
first time poster, long time lurker here. Over at Project EVE
https://github.com/lf-edge/eve I've been trying to migrate
from our current u-boot v2020.07 + patches:
https://github.com/lf-edge/eve/tree/master/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2020.07
to the latest u-boot 2021.04.
Great news is that most of the patches we dependent
on seem to have been pulled upstream. However, this
single *chunk* of one patchset wasn't:
https://github.com/lf-edge/eve/blob/master/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2020.07/0001-usb-xhci-Load-Raspberry-Pi-4-VL805-s-firmware.patch#L293
I'm wondering what was the reason for leaving it behind,
>>>
>>> +CC Nicolas
>>>
- Get rid of PCI core patch as not needed with correct DT PCI topology
>>>
>>> also from the cover letter
>>>
This also depends on a DT/bindings patch available on the linux-mailing
lists:
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@.../msg2205783.html
>>>
>>> The merged version of this series is
>>>
>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-usb/list/?series=310015=%2A=both
>>>
Here is the relevant bit for reference/discussion:
{
pci@1,0 {
#address-cells = <3>;
#size-cells = <2>;
ranges;
reg = <0 0 0 0 0>;
usb@1,0 {
reg = <0x1 0 0 0 0>;
resets = <
RASPBERRYPI_FIRMWARE_RESET_ID_USB>;
};
};
};
>>>
>
> Yes, instead of using a PCI quirk we settled on a reset controller. All in all
> it is less hacky. But needs changes in DT.
>
>> Aha! Thank you so much -- this is super helpful!
>>
since without it I don't seem to have functioning USB
devices on my Raspberry Pi 4. In fact, adding it back:
https://github.com/rvs/eve/tree/u-boot/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2021.04
(just that one chunk -- 'cuz the reset got upstreamed)
seems to solve the issue for me.
Another question I have is that the new u-boot seems to have
some kind of a regression that I can't quite debug. The SMBIOS
tables that it constructs during EFI boot sequence seem to be
broken (see the dmidecode output below). Again, this seems
to be a regression compared to v2020.07. Any ideas on what
could be wrong or how can I start debugging it would be
>>>
Yes, that's not working right now. I'm working on a fix for the tables:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20210406090435.19357-1-matthias@kernel.org/
This will fix the error en dmidecode but the tables will be basically empty.
Before that there was some information that helped you to identify that you are
running on a RaspberryPi.
A quick fix would be to add that information to the DTS. Like for example done
here:
https://source.denx.de/u-boot/u-boot/-/blob/master/arch/arm/dts/rk3328-rock64-u-boot.dtsi#L13
On the long run we want to add a sysinfo driver to read the information for the
mailbox driver and use that. But my understanding is that for that we would need
to create a SPL for the mailbox driver to provide that info in a shared data
structure. It's still on my list for investigation.
Regards,
Matthias
>>> You can always bisect it ;)
>>>
>>
>>
>> LOL -- true! I was just hoping someone would recognize the issue perhaps.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Roman.
>
>
Re: Running u-boot 2021.04 on Raspberry Pi 4
[ Adding Matthias for the SMBIOS part ]
On Fri, 2021-04-09 at 00:00 -0700, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 8:59 PM Sean Anderson wrote:
> > On 4/8/21 8:18 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > first time poster, long time lurker here. Over at Project EVE
> > > https://github.com/lf-edge/eve I've been trying to migrate
> > > from our current u-boot v2020.07 + patches:
> > >
> > > https://github.com/lf-edge/eve/tree/master/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2020.07
> > > to the latest u-boot 2021.04.
> > >
> > > Great news is that most of the patches we dependent
> > > on seem to have been pulled upstream. However, this
> > > single *chunk* of one patchset wasn't:
> > >
> > > https://github.com/lf-edge/eve/blob/master/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2020.07/0001-usb-xhci-Load-Raspberry-Pi-4-VL805-s-firmware.patch#L293
> > >
> > > I'm wondering what was the reason for leaving it behind,
> >
> > +CC Nicolas
> >
> > > - Get rid of PCI core patch as not needed with correct DT PCI topology
> >
> > also from the cover letter
> >
> > > This also depends on a DT/bindings patch available on the linux-mailing
> > > lists:
> > > https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@.../msg2205783.html
> >
> > The merged version of this series is
> >
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-usb/list/?series=310015=%2A=both
> >
> > > Here is the relevant bit for reference/discussion:
> > >
> > > {
> > > pci@1,0 {
> > > #address-cells = <3>;
> > > #size-cells = <2>;
> > > ranges;
> > >
> > > reg = <0 0 0 0 0>;
> > >
> > > usb@1,0 {
> > > reg = <0x1 0 0 0 0>;
> > > resets = <
> > > RASPBERRYPI_FIRMWARE_RESET_ID_USB>;
> > > };
> > > };
> > > };
> >
Yes, instead of using a PCI quirk we settled on a reset controller. All in all
it is less hacky. But needs changes in DT.
> Aha! Thank you so much -- this is super helpful!
>
> > > since without it I don't seem to have functioning USB
> > > devices on my Raspberry Pi 4. In fact, adding it back:
> > >
> > > https://github.com/rvs/eve/tree/u-boot/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2021.04
> > > (just that one chunk -- 'cuz the reset got upstreamed)
> > > seems to solve the issue for me.
> > >
> > > Another question I have is that the new u-boot seems to have
> > > some kind of a regression that I can't quite debug. The SMBIOS
> > > tables that it constructs during EFI boot sequence seem to be
> > > broken (see the dmidecode output below). Again, this seems
> > > to be a regression compared to v2020.07. Any ideas on what
> > > could be wrong or how can I start debugging it would be
> >
> > You can always bisect it ;)
> >
>
>
> LOL -- true! I was just hoping someone would recognize the issue perhaps.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Running u-boot 2021.04 on Raspberry Pi 4
On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 8:59 PM Sean Anderson wrote:
> On 4/8/21 8:18 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > first time poster, long time lurker here. Over at Project EVE
> > https://github.com/lf-edge/eve I've been trying to migrate
> > from our current u-boot v2020.07 + patches:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/lf-edge/eve/tree/master/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2020.07
> > to the latest u-boot 2021.04.
> >
> > Great news is that most of the patches we dependent
> > on seem to have been pulled upstream. However, this
> > single *chunk* of one patchset wasn't:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/lf-edge/eve/blob/master/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2020.07/0001-usb-xhci-Load-Raspberry-Pi-4-VL805-s-firmware.patch#L293
> >
> > I'm wondering what was the reason for leaving it behind,
>
> +CC Nicolas
>
> > - Get rid of PCI core patch as not needed with correct DT PCI topology
>
> also from the cover letter
>
> > This also depends on a DT/bindings patch available on the linux-mailing
> lists:
> > https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@.../msg2205783.html
>
> The merged version of this series is
>
>
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-usb/list/?series=310015=%2A=both
>
> > Here is the relevant bit for reference/discussion:
> >
> > {
> >pci@1,0 {
> >#address-cells = <3>;
> >#size-cells = <2>;
> >ranges;
> >
> >reg = <0 0 0 0 0>;
> >
> >usb@1,0 {
> >reg = <0x1 0 0 0 0>;
> >resets = <
> RASPBERRYPI_FIRMWARE_RESET_ID_USB>;
> >};
> >};
> > };
>
Aha! Thank you so much -- this is super helpful!
> > since without it I don't seem to have functioning USB
> > devices on my Raspberry Pi 4. In fact, adding it back:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/rvs/eve/tree/u-boot/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2021.04
> > (just that one chunk -- 'cuz the reset got upstreamed)
> > seems to solve the issue for me.
> >
> > Another question I have is that the new u-boot seems to have
> > some kind of a regression that I can't quite debug. The SMBIOS
> > tables that it constructs during EFI boot sequence seem to be
> > broken (see the dmidecode output below). Again, this seems
> > to be a regression compared to v2020.07. Any ideas on what
> > could be wrong or how can I start debugging it would be
>
> You can always bisect it ;)
>
LOL -- true! I was just hoping someone would recognize the issue perhaps.
Thanks,
Roman.
Re: Running u-boot 2021.04 on Raspberry Pi 4
On 4/8/21 8:18 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
Hi!
first time poster, long time lurker here. Over at Project EVE
https://github.com/lf-edge/eve I've been trying to migrate
from our current u-boot v2020.07 + patches:
https://github.com/lf-edge/eve/tree/master/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2020.07
to the latest u-boot 2021.04.
Great news is that most of the patches we dependent
on seem to have been pulled upstream. However, this
single *chunk* of one patchset wasn't:
https://github.com/lf-edge/eve/blob/master/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2020.07/0001-usb-xhci-Load-Raspberry-Pi-4-VL805-s-firmware.patch#L293
I'm wondering what was the reason for leaving it behind,
+CC Nicolas
- Get rid of PCI core patch as not needed with correct DT PCI topology
also from the cover letter
This also depends on a DT/bindings patch available on the linux-mailing lists:
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@.../msg2205783.html
The merged version of this series is
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-usb/list/?series=310015=%2A=both
Here is the relevant bit for reference/discussion:
{
pci@1,0 {
#address-cells = <3>;
#size-cells = <2>;
ranges;
reg = <0 0 0 0 0>;
usb@1,0 {
reg = <0x1 0 0 0 0>;
resets = <
RASPBERRYPI_FIRMWARE_RESET_ID_USB>;
};
};
};
since without it I don't seem to have functioning USB
devices on my Raspberry Pi 4. In fact, adding it back:
https://github.com/rvs/eve/tree/u-boot/pkg/u-boot/patches/patches-v2021.04
(just that one chunk -- 'cuz the reset got upstreamed)
seems to solve the issue for me.
Another question I have is that the new u-boot seems to have
some kind of a regression that I can't quite debug. The SMBIOS
tables that it constructs during EFI boot sequence seem to be
broken (see the dmidecode output below). Again, this seems
to be a regression compared to v2020.07. Any ideas on what
could be wrong or how can I start debugging it would be
You can always bisect it ;)
--Sean
greatly appreciated (in fact I actually added printf's to
write_smbios_table() to see if there's any micalculation going
on -- but no -- it seems that all method->write() methods
there work as expected and their cumulative output
adds up to 209 bytes -- but only 128 are present)
Thanks,
Roman.
# dmidecode
Getting SMBIOS data from sysfs.
SMBIOS 3.0 present.
7 structures occupying 209 bytes.
Table at 0x3CB28020.
Wrong DMI structures length: bytes announced, only 128 bytes available.
Handle 0x, DMI type 0, 24 bytes
BIOS Information
Vendor: U-Boot
Version: 2021.04
Release Date: 04/08/2021
ROM Size: 64 kB
Characteristics:
PCI is supported
BIOS is upgradeable
Selectable boot is supported
I2O boot is supported
Targeted content distribution is supported
BIOS Revision: 21.4
Handle 0x0001, DMI type 1, 27 bytes
System Information
Manufacturer: Not Specified
Product Name: Not Specified
Version: Not Specified
Serial Number: 1ffddf0b
UUID: 30303031-3030-3030-3066-666464663062
Wake-up Type: Reserved
SKU Number: Not Specified
Family: Not Specified
Handle 0x0002, DMI type 2, 14 bytes
Base Board Information
Manufacturer: Not Specified
Product Name: Not Specified
Version: Not Specified
Serial Number: Not Specified
Asset Tag: Not Specified
Features:
Board is a hosting board
Location In Chassis: Not Specified
Chassis Handle: 0x
Type: Motherboard
Invalid entry length (0). DMI table is broken! Stop.
