ound for master
branch and v2023.01 delivery.
but the initial commit 777706b ("common/memsize.c: Fix
get_effective_memsize() to
check should be revisited or reverted (in master or in next ?).
For details see comments in patch
"arm: stm32mp: Fix board_get_usable_ram_top() a
On Friday 06 January 2023 10:13:34 Patrick DELAUNAY wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 1/5/23 20:25, Pali Rohar wrote:
> > Ok, so it is working...
> >
> > On Thursday 05 January 2023 19:31:19 Patrick DELAUNAY wrote:
> > > I tested on STM32MP157C-EV1 on my side...
> > >
> > > with 1GiB mermory size
> > >
> > >
On 1/6/23 10:13, Patrick DELAUNAY wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
For me:
get_effective_memsize() must return the effective size of the DDR
and NOT -4KiB to avoid side effects in other part of the code (LMB for
example)
I think today we need to revert your patch.
I agree it would be good to revert the
Hi,
On 1/5/23 20:16, Pali Rohar wrote:
Hello!
On Thursday 05 January 2023 11:03:07 Patrick DELAUNAY wrote:
Hi,
On 1/5/23 02:22, Marek Vasut wrote:
Do not access gd->ram_size and assume this is actual valid RAM size. Since
commit
777706b ("common/memsize.c: Fix get_effective_memsize() to
Hi,
On 1/5/23 20:25, Pali Rohar wrote:
Ok, so it is working...
On Thursday 05 January 2023 19:31:19 Patrick DELAUNAY wrote:
I tested on STM32MP157C-EV1 on my side...
with 1GiB mermory size
U-Boot is booting on next TOP (for trusted boot with TF-A and OP-TEE)
U-Boot 2023.01-rc4-00386-gb429
Hi,
On 1/5/23 21:35, Marek Vasut wrote:
On 1/5/23 19:31, Patrick DELAUNAY wrote:
Hi Marek,
Hi,
[...]
I tested on STM32MP157C-EV1 on my side...
with 1GiB mermory size
U-Boot is booting on next TOP (for trusted boot with TF-A and OP-TEE)
U-Boot 2023.01-rc4-00386-gb429e78942de (Jan 05 2
On 1/5/23 20:25, Pali Rohar wrote:
Ok, so it is working...
No, it is NOT working because the test performed is using completely
different codebase.
The STM32MP15xx platform I have on my desk is hanging on boot with
current U-Boot master, i.e upcoming release. With commit
777706b ("commo
On 1/5/23 19:31, Patrick DELAUNAY wrote:
Hi Marek,
Hi,
[...]
I tested on STM32MP157C-EV1 on my side...
with 1GiB mermory size
U-Boot is booting on next TOP (for trusted boot with TF-A and OP-TEE)
U-Boot 2023.01-rc4-00386-gb429e78942de (Jan 05 2023 - 17:44:04 +0100)
Note that I am not
Ok, so it is working...
On Thursday 05 January 2023 19:31:19 Patrick DELAUNAY wrote:
> I tested on STM32MP157C-EV1 on my side...
>
> with 1GiB mermory size
>
> U-Boot is booting on next TOP (for trusted boot with TF-A and OP-TEE)
>
>
>
> U-Boot 2023.01-rc4-00386-gb429e78942de (Jan 05 2023 - 1
Hello!
On Thursday 05 January 2023 11:03:07 Patrick DELAUNAY wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 1/5/23 02:22, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Do not access gd->ram_size and assume this is actual valid RAM size. Since
> > commit
> > 777706b ("common/memsize.c: Fix get_effective_memsize() to check for
> > overflow")
Hi Marek,
On 1/5/23 13:11, Marek Vasut wrote:
On 1/5/23 11:03, Patrick DELAUNAY wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
On 1/5/23 02:22, Marek Vasut wrote:
Do not access gd->ram_size and assume this is actual valid RAM size.
Since commit
777706b ("common/memsize.c: Fix get_effective_memsize() to check
for ove
On 1/5/23 11:03, Patrick DELAUNAY wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
On 1/5/23 02:22, Marek Vasut wrote:
Do not access gd->ram_size and assume this is actual valid RAM size.
Since commit
777706b ("common/memsize.c: Fix get_effective_memsize() to check
for overflow")
the RAM size may be less than gd->ram_si
Hi,
On 1/5/23 02:22, Marek Vasut wrote:
Do not access gd->ram_size and assume this is actual valid RAM size. Since
commit
777706b ("common/memsize.c: Fix get_effective_memsize() to check for
overflow")
the RAM size may be less than gd->ram_size , call get_effective_memsize() to get
the lim
Do not access gd->ram_size and assume this is actual valid RAM size. Since
commit
777706b ("common/memsize.c: Fix get_effective_memsize() to check for
overflow")
the RAM size may be less than gd->ram_size , call get_effective_memsize() to get
the limited value instead.
The aforementioned com
14 matches
Mail list logo
