This will allow arch(s) that use device tree blobs to pad the end of the
device tree so they can be modified by board files at run time. This will
help prevent errors such as FDT_ERR_NOSPACE from occurring.

Signed-off-by: Eric Schikschneit <eric.schikschneit@novatechautomation.com>
[trini: Change default order so that X86 && EFI_APP works correctly]

The dtbs: target is almost identical in all architecture Makefiles.
All architecture Makefiles include scripts/Makefile.dts . Deduplicate
the dtbs: target into scripts/Makefile.dts . No functional change.

Reviewed-by: Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Tested-by: Caleb Connolly <caleb.connolly@linaro.org> #qcom, OF_UPSTREAM

When building for a custom board, it is quite common to maintain a
private branch which include some defconfig and .dts files. But to
hook up those .dts files requires modifying a file "belonging" to
upstream U-Boot, the arch/*/dts/Makefile. Forward-porting that branch
to a newer upstream then often results in a conflict which, while it
is trivial to resolve by hand, makes it harder to have a CI do "try to
build our board against latest upstream".

The .config usually includes information on precisely what .dtb(s) are
needed, so to avoid having to modify the Makefile, simply add the
files in (SPL_)OF_LIST to dtb-y.

A technicality is that (SPL_)OF_LIST is not always defined, so rework
the Kconfig symbols so that (SPL_)OF_LIST is always defined (when
(SPL_)OF_CONTROL), but only prompted for in the cases which used to be
their "depends on".

nios2 and microblaze already have something like this in their
dts/Makefile, and the rationale in commit 41f59f68539 is similar to
the above. So this simply generalizes existing practice. Followup
patches could remove the logic in those two makefiles, just as there's
potential for moving some common boilerplate from all the
arch/*/dts/Makefile files to the new scripts/Makefile.dts.

Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@prevas.dk>
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>

At present only 4KB of spare space is left in the DTB when building the
EFI app. Increase this to 32KB so there is plenty of space to insert the
binman definition. This cannot be expanded later (as with OF_SEPARATE)
because the ELF image has already been built.

Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Reviwed-by: Heinrich Schuchardt <heinrich.schuchardt@canonical.com>

Add support for coral which is a range of Apollo Lake-based Chromebook
released in 2017. This also includes reef released in 2016, since it is
based on the same SoC.

Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>

Add a new device tree which has very minimum nodes
- x86 reset
- x86 tsc_timer
- x86 pci
- Slim Bootloader serial

Signed-off-by: Aiden Park <aiden.park@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>

Now that we have generic coreboot payload support, remove the
dedicated support for Advantech SOM-6896.

Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>

Currently building U-Boot as the coreboot payload requires user
to change the build configuration for a specific board during
menuconfig process. This uses the board's native device tree
to configure the hardware. For example, the device tree provides
PCI address range for the PCI host controller and U-Boot will
re-program all PCI devices' BAR to be within this range. In order
to make sure we don't mess up the hardware, we should guarantee
the range matches what coreboot programs the chipset.

But we really should make the coreboot payload support easier.
Just like EFI payload, we can create a generic coreboot payload
for all x86 boards as well. The payload is configured to include
as many generic drivers as possible. All stuff that touches low
level initialization are not allowed as such is the coreboot's
responsibility. Platform specific drivers (like gpio, spi, etc)
are not included.

Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>

To avoid confusion, let's rename the efi-x86 target to efi-x86_app.

Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>

It is possible to create a generic EFI payload for all x86 boards.
The payload is configured to include as many generic drivers as
possible. All stuff that touches low-level initialization are not
allowed as such is the EFI BIOS's responsibility. Platform specific
drivers (like gpio, spi, etc) are not included.

Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>