Re: [PATCH v2 09/10] rockchip: binman: Add support for Falcon mode FIT images with TF-A+Linux
Alexey Charkov <[email protected]> Tue, 4 Aug 2026 18:38:41 +0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAKTNdwEDbR66-wn9fvmVFxGpOGjCmhJVcxgvVYbD_pCOb0SL-A@mail.gmail.com> |
Hi Simon, On Tue, Aug 4, 2026 at 5:03=E2=80=AFPM Simon Glass <[email protected]> wrote= : > > Hi Alexey, > > On 2026-07-31T17:10:44, Alexey Charkov <[email protected]> wrote: > > rockchip: binman: Add support for Falcon mode FIT images with TF-A+Linu= x > > > > Modern Rockchip SoCs such as RK3576 require TF-A to be running to provi= de > > firmware services to the OS. To enable booting Linux in Falcon mode on > > such SoCs, add a binman template for generation of FIT images containin= g > > appropriately split TF-A and TEE binaries (as is currently done by binm= an > > for U-boot proper images), externally provided Linux kernel and optiona= lly > > an initrd. > > > > Any FDTs provided to the generator will be pre-patched with a /chosen > > node containing an initrd load address and size (if an initrd is provid= ed) > > and a bootargs property containing the kernel command line (if provided= ), > > so that the kernel can be booted directly without external preprocessin= g. > > > > A config fragment rockchip-falcon.config can be used to enable Falcon > > mode boot and the building of TF-A+Falcon with binman, e.g.: > > > > make nanopi-m5-rk3576_defconfig \ > > rockchip-falcon.config > > > > [...] > > > > arch/arm/dts/rockchip-u-boot.dtsi | 204 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++= +------ > > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig | 49 ++++++++ > > board/rockchip/rockchip-falcon.config | 3 + > > 3 files changed, 225 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/rockchip-u-boot.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/rockchip-= u-boot.dtsi > > @@ -260,6 +372,36 @@ > > + payload { > > + type =3D "section"; > > + align =3D <CONFIG_SYS_CACHELINE_SIZE>; > > + /* > > + * Must be named 'u-boot-any', unlike the non-Fal= con > > + * image which can call this 'fit': SPL declares > > + * binman_sym(u_boot_any, image_pos) unconditiona= lly, and > > + * binman resolves that symbol against an entry o= f that > > + * exact name or one called u-boot[-elf|-img|-nod= tb]. > > + * Those only exist here by way of a U-Boot image= inside > > + * the FIT, which a Falcon FIT does not carry, so= without > > + * this name the symbol cannot be resolved and bi= nman > > + * fails. The type property is what selects the e= type. > > + */ > > + u-boot-any { > > + type =3D "fit"; > > + insert-template =3D <&fit_falcon_template= >; > > + }; > > A node called u-boot-any whose type is fit - needing a nine-line > comment to explain why - is a strong hint that we are papering over > something. Patch 8 already adds binman_sym_declare_optional() for the > payload symbol on the RAM_DEVICE path; the cleaner fix is to make > u_boot_any similarly optional (or key off SPL_OS_BOOT/RAM_DEVICE) in > common/spl/spl.c so a Falcon-only image does not need this pretence. > Then this entry can simply be named fit like its sibling in > simple-bin-usb472 and the comment goes away. What do you think? Hmm, that woud be nice indeed. Let me give it a try. > > diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/rockchip-u-boot.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/rockchip-= u-boot.dtsi > > @@ -161,6 +182,97 @@ > > + ramdisk { > > + description =3D "ramdisk"; > > + type =3D "ramdisk"; > > + arch =3D FIT_ARCH; > > + compression =3D "none"; > > + load =3D <FALCON_INITRD_LOAD>; > > + > > + linux-initrd { > > + optional; > > + }; > > Just to check - when LINUX_INITRD is not provided, does the outer > ramdisk image node still land in the FIT as a zero-byte data blob, and > does SPL then try to load a zero-byte ramdisk loadable to > FALCON_INITRD_LOAD? _process_firmware_prop() skips missing entries > when populating firmware, but I couldn't convince myself the same > happens for the enclosing image node itself. If it does not, please > add a testcase (or drop the ramdisk node entirely when the inner entry > is absent). The node still lands in the FIT with a size of zero, and the loader skips it based on its zero size. See also a related fix here: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20260730-b4-spl-fit-clear-= [email protected]/ > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kc= onfig > > @@ -758,6 +758,55 @@ config ROCKCHIP_MASKROM_IMAGE > > +config ROCKCHIP_FALCON_KERNEL_LOAD > > + hex "Falcon mode kernel load offset" > > + depends on ROCKCHIP_FALCON_IMAGE > > + default 0x10000000 > > These three offsets are per-SoC in practice (BL31 / OP-TEE carve-outs > differ between RK3568, RK3576, RK3588=E2=80=A6) yet the defaults are the = same > for every Rockchip target. Please either narrow the default to the SoC > families you have validated, or add a note in the help text listing > which SoC the 0x10000000 / 0x1c000000 / 0x1e000000 layout matches, so > users of other Rockchip parts do not silently overlap BL31 and wonder > why the kernel never starts. Indeed, I haven't checked which segments BL31/TEE want to load to on SoCs other than RK3576; I only checked the addresses they hardcode elsewhere in U-Boot. Let me revisit this part, thanks for calling it out. > > diff --git a/board/rockchip/rockchip-falcon.config b/board/rockchip/roc= kchip-falcon.config > > @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ > > +CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_FALCON_IMAGE=3Dy > > +CONFIG_SPL_OS_BOOT=3Dy > > +CONFIG_SYS_SPI_KERNEL_OFFS=3D0x0 > > CONFIG_SYS_SPI_KERNEL_OFFS depends on SPL_SPI_FLASH_SUPPORT && > SPL_OS_BOOT and is only read by common/spl/spl_spi.c - none of the > boot paths added by this series use it. Please drop this line, or > explain in the commit message why it needs to be forced to 0 here. The nanopi-m5 defconfig enables SPL_SPI_FLASH_SUPPORT, so without giving this option a value I end up with an endless loop of prompts for it when building non-interactively (even though it's never used in my setup). Maybe defaulting it to the U-Boot offset inside the relevant Kconfig would be cleaner - let me check if that works. Best regards, Alexey