On Mon, 31 Aug 2020, Bjorn Andersson via System-dt wrote:
> On Mon 31 Aug 16:04 UTC 2020, Tomas Evensen via System-dt wrote:
>
> > Here are some brief notes from the meeting.
> >
> > If nothing else as a showcase on how much we miss Nathalie when she is on vacation ????
> >
> > Krzysztof Kepa – GE
> > Mathieu Poirier – Linaro
> > Etsam Anjum – Mentor
> > Anrnoud Pouliquen – ST
> > Loic Pallardy - ST
> > Suman Anna - TI
> > Dan Milea – Wind River
> > Mark Dapoz – Wind River
> > Tomas Evensen – Xilinx
> > Stefano Stabellini – Xilinx
> > Bruce Ashfield – Xilinx
> > Ed Mooring – Xilinx
> > Ben Levinsky - Xilinx
> >
> > Stefano went through slides.
> > Overall idea:
> >
> > 1. Specify remoteproc channels with minimal information in System-DT in a way that is as common as possible for all vendors.
> > In particular, we are avoiding to have to specify the same memory regions in more than one place. A resource group is specially marked to contain most information.
> > 2. Use Lopper to create the vendor specific remoteproc specification
> > Generating reserved-memory, etc. information that has duplicate information.
> > For the time being, no plans to unify the vendor specific information that goes into the traditional device tree for Linux
> > 3. Later (or in parallel), but without making it a gating item, start discussions on what we can do to unify the vendor specific information in the traditional DT
>
> Can anyone point me to some examples of vendor specific information
> referred to here?
Some of the other attendees might have better examples than this. The
ones I was mentioning this morning are the "mboxes" and "mbox-names"
properties you can see in the "output.txt" example. Also the memory
regions listed under the "memory-region" property and under
"reserved-memory".
On Mon, 31 Aug 2020, Tomas Evensen via System-dt wrote:
> Stefano to send out examples and slides
I am attaching the slides and examples, where:
- input.txt is the system device tree snippet, input to lopper
- output.txt is the traditional device tree snipper, output from lopper
On Mon 31 Aug 16:04 UTC 2020, Tomas Evensen via System-dt wrote:
> Here are some brief notes from the meeting.
>
> If nothing else as a showcase on how much we miss Nathalie when she is on vacation ????
>
> Krzysztof Kepa – GE
> Mathieu Poirier – Linaro
> Etsam Anjum – Mentor
> Anrnoud Pouliquen – ST
> Loic Pallardy - ST
> Suman Anna - TI
> Dan Milea – Wind River
> Mark Dapoz – Wind River
> Tomas Evensen – Xilinx
> Stefano Stabellini – Xilinx
> Bruce Ashfield – Xilinx
> Ed Mooring – Xilinx
> Ben Levinsky - Xilinx
>
> Stefano went through slides.
> Overall idea:
>
> 1. Specify remoteproc channels with minimal information in System-DT in a way that is as common as possible for all vendors.
> In particular, we are avoiding to have to specify the same memory regions in more than one place. A resource group is specially marked to contain most information.
> 2. Use Lopper to create the vendor specific remoteproc specification
> Generating reserved-memory, etc. information that has duplicate information.
> For the time being, no plans to unify the vendor specific information that goes into the traditional device tree for Linux
> 3. Later (or in parallel), but without making it a gating item, start discussions on what we can do to unify the vendor specific information in the traditional DT
Can anyone point me to some examples of vendor specific information
referred to here?
Regards,
Bjorn
>
> Discussion about how TI and ST might generate their specific information from this specification.
>
> Stefano to send out examples and slides.
> Ben: Xilinx backend to Lopper is upstreamed and available as an example. Might change as upstreaming continues.
>
> Question:
> * How do we configure VirtIO?
>
>
>
> From: nathalie(a)xilinx.com
> When: 8:00 AM - 9:00 AM August 31, 2020
> Subject: [System-dt] System DT call: OpenAMP bindings
> Location: webex
>
>
> CAUTION: This message has originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.
>
> Hi all,
>
> The OpenAMP-remoteproc working group is looking forward to discuss OpenAMP bindings with the System DT working group & all others interested in System DT.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Nathalie C. Chan King Choy
> Program Manager focused on Open Source & Community
>
> Meeting number (access code): 145 853 2028
>
> Meeting password: NgTwf4r8R$3
>
>
>
> Monday, August 31, 2020
> 8:00 am | (UTC-07:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) | 1 hr
>
>
>
> Join meeting<https://xilinx.webex.com/xilinx/j.php?MTID=mcd4ad9bca009dfef38671c26d5a1d301>
>
>
>
> Canada toll free 1-844-426-4405
> France toll free 0800-912-485
> India toll free 000-800-040-1016
> Sweden toll free 020-033-6721
> UK toll free 08000315372
> United States Toll Free 1-844-621-3956
>
> Global call-in numbers<https://xilinx.webex.com/xilinx/globalcallin.php?MTID=m370fae0984a8792a3592…> | Toll-free calling restrictions<https://www.webex.com/pdf/tollfree_restrictions.pdf>
> This email and any attachments are intended for the sole use of the named recipient(s) and contain(s) confidential information that may be proprietary, privileged or copyrighted under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, copy, or forward this email message or any attachments. Delete this email message and any attachments immediately.
> --
> System-dt mailing list
> System-dt(a)lists.openampproject.org
> https://lists.openampproject.org/mailman/listinfo/system-dt
Hi,
This Wednesday agenda is:
- Presentation of RiscV DT by Atish Patra
- Proposal of DT authentication/identification/format PoC by Joakim/FF
Cordially,
FF
It has been a long time since there has been a regular EBBR review
meeting, and with the amount of activity that has happened in the last
year I think it is time to start meeting again. I'd like to start
talking about content for EBBR v1.0+.
A biweekly cadence seems about right to me, but we can discuss when we
start meetings again. Would Monday, 31 Aug at 16:00BST, 08:00PST work?
Email me privately if you want me to send you a calendar invite.
Discussion topics:
- EBBR testing progress
- EBBR Scope -- doing a better job to describe the purpose of EBBR
- Tightening requirements as U-Boot implementation matures (make fewer
things optional)
- Security requirements - Secure boot and secure capsule update
- issue review
- Signing requirements on dtbs and variables
Send me an email if you want to add to the agenda, or add an issue to
the github page:
https://github.com/arm-software/ebbr/issues
g.
----
Time: Every second Monday starting 31 Aug at 16:00BST, 08:00PST
Join Zoom Meeting
https://armltd.zoom.us/j/92081365511?pwd=SFZpRitXUEp3Zy9GM0h3UUZ1b1pnUT09
Meeting ID: 920 8136 5511
Password: 490324
One tap mobile
+14086380968,,92081365511#,,#,490324# US (San Jose)
+16465189805,,92081365511#,,#,490324# US (New York)
Dial by your location
+1 408 638 0968 US (San Jose)
+1 646 518 9805 US (New York)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
Meeting ID: 920 8136 5511
Password: 490324
Find your local number: https://armltd.zoom.us/u/adYiWaDyys
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
Hi,
I just updated the technical report
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CLkhLRaz_zcCq44DLGmPZQFPbYHOC6nzPowaL0X…>
with a section on "Trusting DT" that is the result of my analysis of the
discussion we had (not what I presented).
Please comment, correct, update...
Cordially,
FF
--
François-Frédéric Ozog | *Director Linaro Edge & Fog Computing Group*
T: +33.67221.6485
francois.ozog(a)linaro.org | Skype: ffozog
Hi all,
The OpenAMP-remoteproc working group is looking forward to discuss OpenAMP bindings with the System DT working group & all others interested in System DT.
Best regards,
Nathalie C. Chan King Choy
Program Manager focused on Open Source & Community
Meeting number (access code): 145 853 2028
Meeting password: NgTwf4r8R$3
Monday, August 31, 2020
8:00 am | (UTC-07:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) | 1 hr
Join meeting<https://xilinx.webex.com/xilinx/j.php?MTID=mcd4ad9bca009dfef38671c26d5a1d301>
Canada toll free 1-844-426-4405
France toll free 0800-912-485
India toll free 000-800-040-1016
Sweden toll free 020-033-6721
UK toll free 08000315372
United States Toll Free 1-844-621-3956
Global call-in numbers<https://xilinx.webex.com/xilinx/globalcallin.php?MTID=m370fae0984a8792a3592…> | Toll-free calling restrictions<https://www.webex.com/pdf/tollfree_restrictions.pdf>
Hi All,
We are interested in adopting EBBR as the boot specification for the
embedded RISC-V platforms.
We firmly believe that EBBR is a very well defined specification for
boot requirement and there
is no need for reinventing the wheel for RISC-V. Hence, this is a
thread to discuss all the requirements
for adding RISC-V to EBBR. Here is my current understanding. Please
correct me if I am wrong.
Logistic Requirement:
1. As per the contribution guidelines[1], patches should be sent to
boot-architecture(a)lists.linaro.org.
and the specification will be hosted under "ARM-software" Github.
I am hoping that introducing RISC-V
related changes are okay with the current maintainers.
2. The specification is licensed under Creative Commons. The RISC-V
related changes will refer to
some of the RISC-V specifications as well. AFAIK, there shouldn't
be an issue with that.
3. It should be okay to add other copyrights in addition to "Arm
Limited and Contributors".
Technical Requirement:
1. Software status:
a. UEFI support for RISC-V Linux kernel is already available in
the mailing list[2]. The targeted upstream
merge is the 5.10 merge window.
b. U-Boot already supports UEFI for RISC-V.
c. EDK2 upstreaming is currently under progress [3] as well.
Is it okay to start sending patches for EBBR RISC-V related changes
now or do we need to wait for EDK2 and Linux
kernel patches to be available upstream ?
2. RISC-V related sections in EBBR
a. UEFI:
Currently, RISC-V doesn't support a EFI_RESET_SYSTEM boot
service as firmware doesn't have a standard way
to reset the system. There is a proposal to add a system reset
function to Supervisor Binary Specification(SBI) which
can be mapped to EFI_RESET_SYSTEM by the firmware. Apart from
that, I believe RISC-V supports all UEFI boot and
run time services mandated by EBBR. Is it a blocker for RISC-V
EBBR compatibility?
b. RISC-V Multiprocessor Startup Protocol: This section will
contain the details of booting protocol for RISC-V and mandatory
RISC-V specifications that need to be implemented.
c. Firmware Storage: AFAIK, RISC-V platforms are already
compatible with this.
Please let me know if I missed something or oversimplified any
requirement. We want to make RISC-V compatible with EBBR
sooner than later and ready work on any missing pieces if any.
[1] https://github.com/ARM-software/ebbr/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.rst
[2] https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/8/19/1252
[3] https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/63831?p=,,,20,0,0,0::Created,,RISC-V…
[4] https://lists.riscv.org/g/tech-unixplatformspec/message/49?p=,,,20,0,0,0::r…
--
Regards,
Atish