Re: [meta-rockchip][PATCH v2] Rock64: add machine


Yann Dirson
 

Le mar. 15 juin 2021 à 10:16, Trevor Woerner <twoerner@gmail.com> a écrit :

On Tue 2021-06-15 @ 10:03:31 AM, Yann Dirson wrote:
Le lun. 14 juin 2021 à 18:19, Trevor Woerner <twoerner@gmail.com> a écrit :

Hi Yann,

Thanks for the contribution!

On Mon 2021-05-31 @ 04:00:58 PM, yann.dirson@blade-group.com wrote:
From: Yann Dirson <yann@blade-group.com>

This is a RK3328 board from Pine64.
Board details at https://wiki.pine64.org/wiki/ROCK64.

Default image is built to boot from SD-card. Building an image for
eMMC requires to set RK_BOOT_DEVICE="mmcblk0".

Signed-off-by: Yann Dirson <yann@blade-group.com>
---

This is just basic initial support without a kernel BSP. As is the
board boots with a serial console.

Note I had to create the SoC definition for rk3328, and rather than
setting serial at 115200 there just to have the board definition
override it with rockchip-standard 1500000 I've set the latter right
in rk3328.inc.
Sounds good. I prefer the rockchip default of 1,500,000 anyway.


Changes in v2:
- include Ayufan's patch for mmc aliases so presence of eMMC won't
prevent booting from SD

conf/machine/include/rk3328.inc | 25 ++++++++++++++++
conf/machine/rock64.conf | 30 +++++++++++++++++++
...an-dtsi-rk3328-add-mmc0-mmc1-aliases.patch | 27 +++++++++++++++++
recipes-kernel/linux/linux-yocto%.bbappend | 6 ++++
4 files changed, 88 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 conf/machine/include/rk3328.inc
create mode 100644 conf/machine/rock64.conf
create mode 100644 recipes-kernel/linux/files/0001-ayufan-dtsi-rk3328-add-mmc0-mmc1-aliases.patch

diff --git a/conf/machine/include/rk3328.inc b/conf/machine/include/rk3328.inc
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7d67627
--- /dev/null
+++ b/conf/machine/include/rk3328.inc
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+# Copyright (C) 2020 Garmin Ltd. or its subsidaries
Odd that you'd be assigning the copyright to Garmin ;-)
Oh, right, copypaste rules around here, so Garmin does have a role but
something may be missing :)


+# Released under the MIT license (see COPYING.MIT for the terms)
+
+SOC_FAMILY = "rk3328"
+
+DEFAULTTUNE ?= "cortexa53-crypto"
+
+require conf/machine/include/soc-family.inc
+require conf/machine/include/tune-cortexa53.inc
+require conf/machine/include/rockchip-defaults.inc
+
+KBUILD_DEFCONFIG ?= "defconfig"
+KERNEL_CLASSES = "kernel-fitimage"
+KERNEL_IMAGETYPE = "fitImage"
+
+TFA_PLATFORM = "rk3328"
+TFA_BUILD_TARGET = "bl31"
+
+UBOOT_SUFFIX ?= "itb"
+UBOOT_ENTRYPOINT ?= "0x06000000"
+
+SERIAL_CONSOLES = "1500000;ttyS2"
+
+PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/bootloader ?= "u-boot"
+SPL_BINARY ?= "idbloader.img"
diff --git a/conf/machine/rock64.conf b/conf/machine/rock64.conf
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..38bc9fa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/conf/machine/rock64.conf
@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+# Copyright (C) 2021 Blade SAS
Can you also specify an OSS-friendly licence too?

+
+#@TYPE: Machine
+#@NAME: Rock64
+#@DESCRIPTION: Rock64 RK3328 board from Pine64
+
+require include/rk3328.inc
+
+MACHINE_FEATURES += "usbhost serial"
+
+UBOOT_MACHINE = "rock64-rk3328_defconfig"
+KERNEL_DEVICETREE = "rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dtb"
+
+# set to mmcblk0 for booting from optional eMMC
+RK_BOOT_DEVICE ?= "mmcblk1"
+
+WKS_FILE ?= "rock-pi-4.wks"
Personally I'd prefer to see a rock64 wic file which includes an rk3328
default, even if it is a copy of the rock-pi-4 layout.
In fact we already have rock-pi-e.wks doing this.


Right that was something I wondered how to deal with and forgot (and note that
for the nanopi-m4 I used the same file).

My reading of [1] is that all rockchip APs are using the same
partition table. I see
that the existing {rk3288,rk3399}-boot.wks only differ in the choice
of u-boot image,
and I'm wondering if using the SoC to distinguish between them is the
right choice,
as eg. upstream RK is not using the .itb format, and I suspect we
could use it as well
for rk3288 (I'm sure I have one in a drawer and could check that some day). Now
maybe the sate of things is different for 32bit SoCs, and I thought it
could make sense to
distinguish rockchip-32bit-boot.wks and rockchip-64bit-boot.wks, or maybe even
name them using the format, as something like rockchip-legacy-boot.wks
(well there
is probably a more descriptive name for that format) and rockchip-itb-boot.wks ?

Similarly, the .wks for 3288-based boards and for 3399-based ones only
differ by the
console baudrate, and the 3288-based .wks are all identical except for
some whitespace.
And in fact, it is not unthinkable for a given project to use
something else than a
single-partition layout, so those files are indeed closer to a
"default wks". Maybe we
could use more generic filenames there too (until we implement a way to avoid
hardcoding the baudrate here)

[1] http://opensource.rock-chips.com/wiki_Boot_option
True. We could definitely use some cleanup in this area. If you want to
propose something that's going to work, I'll add it.

Also, when adding a new board, please update the top-level README.
Let's do the minimum for now for this to get merged, and we'll improve
incrementally.
Eg. only now I realize, through the presence of rk3328-boot.wks, that
rock-pi-e is
indeed also based on that soc, and its machine def would benefit from
including the
same rk3328.inc.

--
Yann Dirson <yann@blade-group.com>
Blade / Shadow -- http://shadow.tech

Join yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org to automatically receive all group messages.