Skip to content

Rb3gen2: Add support for Open Boot firmware (TF-A, OP-TEE and U-Boot) build #1172

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Rb3gen2: Add support for Open Boot firmware (TF-A, OP-TEE and U-Boot) build #1172

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
074bc4f
layer.conf: add meta-arm to LAYERDEPENDS
b49020 Oct 30, 2025
297f464
recipes-bsp: Add trusted-firmware-a support for RB3Gen2
b49020 Oct 29, 2025
d25d38f
recipes-security: Add OP-TEE recipes override for RB3Gen2
b49020 Oct 29, 2025
aa97c88
qcs6490-rb3gen2: Add U-Boot support for RB3Gen2
b49020 Oct 29, 2025
beff201
qcs6490-rb3gen2: Add support for open firmware machine features
b49020 Oct 31, 2025
5b04d7e
CI: Add KAS yaml file to build open boot firmware stack
b49020 Oct 30, 2025
2376dc9
github/workflows: Extend CI to compile open boot firmware for RB3Gen2
b49020 Oct 30, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
5 changes: 5 additions & 0 deletions conf/machine/qcs6490-rb3gen2-core-kit.conf
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -13,9 +13,14 @@ KERNEL_DEVICETREE ?= " \
qcom/qcs6490-rb3gen2-vision-mezzanine.dtb \
"

EXTRA_IMAGEDEPENDS += "${@bb.utils.contains('MACHINE_FEATURES', 'tfa', 'trusted-firmware-a', '', d)}"
Copy link
Contributor

@ndechesne ndechesne Nov 7, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is tfa a new MACHINE_FEATURE?

Copy link
Member Author

@b49020 b49020 Nov 7, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, it is a new machine feature since you asked for it in previous review.

Copy link
Contributor

@ndechesne ndechesne Nov 7, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

we should document them, somehow, somewhere..

Copy link
Member Author

@b49020 b49020 Nov 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Okay, I can document them here conf/machine/include/qcom-common.inc.

PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/bootloader = "${@bb.utils.contains('MACHINE_FEATURES','u-boot','u-boot','',d)}"
TFA_UBOOT:pn-trusted-firmware-a = "${@bb.utils.contains('MACHINE_FEATURES','u-boot','1','0',d)}"
Copy link
Contributor

@lumag lumag Nov 7, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It feels strange at a first glance that machine configuration (which should also define MACHINE_FEATURES) also depends on them. Please add a comment here, how is it expected to be enabled.


MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS += " \
packagegroup-rb3gen2-firmware \
packagegroup-rb3gen2-hexagon-dsp-binaries \
packagegroup-optee \
Copy link
Contributor

@ndechesne ndechesne Nov 7, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

we probably don't want when optee is not enabled/available. no?

Copy link
Member Author

@b49020 b49020 Nov 7, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I added checks for "optee" as a machine feature within the "packagegroup-optee" since yocto-check-layers complained about it. Adding a machine feature check here felt redundant but I can add it if you want.

Copy link
Contributor

@ndechesne ndechesne Nov 7, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

i see. I think it should be the other way around. packagegroup-optee should include them always, and we should include the packagegroup here only when optee is enabled.

Copy link
Member Author

@b49020 b49020 Nov 7, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I did that initially, but yocto-check-layers complained about "packagegroup-optee" as an independent entity since a machine compatible is required to build optee-test and others.

Copy link
Contributor

@ndechesne ndechesne Nov 7, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

we need to figure out if this is the right thing to do..

Copy link
Member Author

@b49020 b49020 Nov 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Okay, let me add machine check here as well for consistency.

Copy link
Contributor

@lumag lumag Nov 7, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please keep the list sorted

"

QCOM_CDT_FILE = "cdt_core_kit"
Expand Down