Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-52538-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20231116172859.393744-1-sjg@chromium.org> <20231208150042.GA1278773-robh@kernel.org>
 <CAPnjgZ2i4gvgiUeHPOfHuOdBooV4e=QQEq6iMo0JbDwOS6dCwA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_Jsq+xMZ8yz4H9D59uCSyX4h5W+4ruGF++=wVA=msXz+Y01A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPnjgZ1uW8T6woXSqFUNm301=W3zBYOrADREkrz=DuwSW87qZg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20231214172702.GA617226-robh@kernel.org> <CAPnjgZ2oJSGPO91Y_aLbe+v250WFrND4n3T0mOvhERYidVu=eQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFLszTizRRVbRO6_ygE2X-Lp5dENWSc4uMGL5GPJAFGAbRdCyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_Jsq+j7_KZtQ2ENq9+vsw0LOZF=spu293_G=AxOmBM+m_f-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFLszTimaFw9sf=JKvQXG4fS6V_2T=2n+pfvYLCiuG1o+7cHPA@mail.gmail.com> <20240205085056.44278f2c@xps-13>
In-Reply-To: <20240205085056.44278f2c@xps-13>
From: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2024 04:59:28 -0700
Message-ID: <CAFLszTi+8ygXOidnhxj7sdJwc6X5i+++QvnUyfe-kde5eSts_w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/3] dt-bindings: mtd: partitions: Add binman compatible
To: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>, 
	Michael Walle <mwalle@kernel.org>, U-Boot Mailing List <u-boot@lists.denx.de>, 
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>, Pratyush Yadav <ptyadav@amazon.de>, 
	=?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= <rafal@milecki.pl>, 
	Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>, Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Miquel,

On Mon, 5 Feb 2024 at 00:50, Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com> wrot=
e:
>
> Hi Simon,
>
> sjg@chromium.org wrote on Sun, 4 Feb 2024 05:07:38 -0700:
>
> > Hi Rob,
> >
> > On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 at 08:56, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 3:54=E2=80=AFPM Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>=
 wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Rob,
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 2:09=E2=80=AFPM Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.o=
rg> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Rob,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 at 10:27, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote=
:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 03:58:10PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi Rob,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 14:56, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wr=
ote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 11:47=E2=80=AFAM Simon Glass <sjg@ch=
romium.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi Rob,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 08:00, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org=
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 10:28:50AM -0700, Simon Glass w=
rote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Add a compatible string for binman, so we can extend =
fixed-partitions
> > > > > > > > > > > in various ways.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > (no changes since v5)
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Changes in v5:
> > > > > > > > > > > - Add #address/size-cells and parternProperties
> > > > > > > > > > > - Drop $ref to fixed-partitions.yaml
> > > > > > > > > > > - Drop 'select: false'
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Changes in v4:
> > > > > > > > > > > - Change subject line
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Changes in v3:
> > > > > > > > > > > - Drop fixed-partition additional compatible string
> > > > > > > > > > > - Drop fixed-partitions from the example
> > > > > > > > > > > - Mention use of compatible instead of label
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Changes in v2:
> > > > > > > > > > > - Drop mention of 'enhanced features' in fixed-partit=
ions.yaml
> > > > > > > > > > > - Mention Binman input and output properties
> > > > > > > > > > > - Use plain partition@xxx for the node name
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >  .../bindings/mtd/partitions/binman.yaml       | 68 +=
++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > > > > > > >  .../bindings/mtd/partitions/partitions.yaml   |  1 +
> > > > > > > > > > >  MAINTAINERS                                   |  5 +=
+
> > > > > > > > > > >  3 files changed, 74 insertions(+)
> > > > > > > > > > >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings=
/mtd/partitions/binman.yaml
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/pa=
rtitions/binman.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/bin=
man.yaml
> > > > > > > > > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > > > > > > > > index 000000000000..329217550a98
> > > > > > > > > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partition=
s/binman.yaml
> > > > > > > > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
> > > > > > > > > > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > > > > > > > > > > +# Copyright 2023 Google LLC
> > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > +%YAML 1.2
> > > > > > > > > > > +---
> > > > > > > > > > > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/mtd/partitions/bi=
nman.yaml#
> > > > > > > > > > > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yam=
l#
> > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > +title: Binman firmware layout
> > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > +maintainers:
> > > > > > > > > > > +  - Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > +description: |
> > > > > > > > > > > +  The binman node provides a layout for firmware, us=
ed when packaging firmware
> > > > > > > > > > > +  from multiple projects. It is based on fixed-parti=
tions, with some
> > > > > > > > > > > +  extensions, but uses 'compatible' to indicate the =
contents of the node, to
> > > > > > > > > > > +  avoid perturbing or confusing existing installatio=
ns which use 'label' for a
> > > > > > > > > > > +  particular purpose.
> > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > +  Binman supports properties used as inputs to the f=
irmware-packaging process,
> > > > > > > > > > > +  such as those which control alignment of partition=
s. This binding addresses
> > > > > > > > > > > +  these 'input' properties. For example, it is commo=
n for the 'reg' property
> > > > > > > > > > > +  (an 'output' property) to be set by Binman, based =
on the alignment requested
> > > > > > > > > > > +  in the input.
> > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > +  Once processing is complete, input properties have=
 mostly served their
> > > > > > > > > > > +  purpose, at least until the firmware is repacked l=
ater, e.g. due to a
> > > > > > > > > > > +  firmware update. The 'fixed-partitions' binding sh=
ould provide enough
> > > > > > > > > > > +  information to read the firmware at runtime, inclu=
ding decompression if
> > > > > > > > > > > +  needed.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > How is this going to work exactly? binman reads these n=
odes and then
> > > > > > > > > > writes out 'fixed-partitions' nodes. But then you've lo=
st the binman
> > > > > > > > > > specifc parts needed for repacking.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > No, they are the same node. I do want the extra informati=
on to stick
> > > > > > > > > around. So long as it is compatible with fixed-partition =
as well, this
> > > > > > > > > should work OK.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > How can it be both? The partitions node compatible can be e=
ither
> > > > > > > > 'fixed-partitions' or 'binman'.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Can we not allow it to be both? I have tried to adjust things=
 in
> > > > > > > response to feedback but perhaps the feedback was leading me =
down the
> > > > > > > wrong path?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sure, but then the schema has to and that means extending
> > > > > > fixed-partitions.
> > > > >
> > > > > Can we cross that bridge later? There might be resistance to it. =
I'm
> > > > > not sure. For now, perhaps just a binman compatible works well en=
ough
> > > > > to make progress.
> > > >
> > > > Is there any way to make progress on this? I would like to have
> > > > software which doesn't understand the binman compatible to at least=
 be
> > > > able to understand the fixed-partition compatible. Is that acceptab=
le?
> > >
> > > There's only 2 ways that it can work. Either binman writes out
> > > fixed-partition nodes dropping/replacing anything only defined for
> > > binman or fixed-partition is extended to include what binman needs.
> >
> > OK, then I suppose the best way is to add a new binman compatible, as
> > is done with this v6 series. People then need to choose it instead of
> > fixed-partition.
>
> I'm sorry this is not at all what Rob suggested, or did I totally
> misunderstand his answer?
>
> In both cases the solution is to generate a "fixed-partition" node. Now
> up to you to decide whether binman should adapt the output to the
> current schema, or if the current schema should be extended to
> understand all binman's output.
>
> At least that is my understanding and also what I kind of agree with.

I do want to binman schema to include all the features of Binman.

So are you saying that there should not be a 'binman'  schema, but I
should just add all the binman properties to the fixed-partition
schema?

Regards,
Simon