Hi,
On Wed, 5 Jul 2023 at 09:35, Tom Rini wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 02:13:01PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> > On 04/07/2023 14:04, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> >
> > > The boards that do not check the return value might start to behave
> > > wrongly without an obvious error to help the de
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 02:13:01PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> On 04/07/2023 14:04, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
>
> > The boards that do not check the return value might start to behave
> > wrongly without an obvious error to help the debugging.
>
> Yes, the current implementation of fdt_status_di
On 04/07/2023 14:04, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
The boards that do not check the return value might start to behave
wrongly without an obvious error to help the debugging.
Yes, the current implementation of fdt_status_disabled() is fragile, but
there's not so much we can do for the upcoming 2023
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 12:57:34PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 12:12 PM Francesco Dolcini
> wrote:
>
> > Now that the situation is pretty much clear I am not overly concerned for
> > colibri-imx7s.
> >
> > Do we consider this something to be worried about for other board
On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 12:12 PM Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> Now that the situation is pretty much clear I am not overly concerned for
> colibri-imx7s.
>
> Do we consider this something to be worried about for other boards?
There are only three boards that check the return value from
fdt_status_di
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 05:23:03PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:14:57AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 05:12:42PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:39:59AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> > > > Then for the next cycle,
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:14:57AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 05:12:42PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:39:59AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> > > Then for the next cycle, we should plan on adding this
> > > fdt_increase_size() into the common fd
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:09:06AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:39:59AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> > Then for the next cycle, we should plan on adding this
> > fdt_increase_size() into the common fdt_status_disabled().
>
> I'm a little leary of generic changes here having
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 05:12:42PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:39:59AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> > Then for the next cycle, we should plan on adding this
> > fdt_increase_size() into the common fdt_status_disabled().
> >
> > Does it work?
>
> Now that the situ
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:39:59AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Then for the next cycle, we should plan on adding this
> fdt_increase_size() into the common fdt_status_disabled().
>
> Does it work?
Now that the situation is pretty much clear I am not overly concerned for
colibri-imx7s.
Do we co
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:39:59AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Hi Francesco,
>
> On Mon, Jul 3, 2023 at 5:49 PM Francesco Dolcini wrote:
>
> > If I do this small partial revert
> >
> > --- a/arch/arm/dts/imx7d-colibri-eval-v3-u-boot.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm/dts/imx7d-colibri-eval-v3-u-boot.dtsi
Hi Francesco,
On Mon, Jul 3, 2023 at 5:49 PM Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> If I do this small partial revert
>
> --- a/arch/arm/dts/imx7d-colibri-eval-v3-u-boot.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/imx7d-colibri-eval-v3-u-boot.dtsi
> @@ -15,7 +15,8 @@
> pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_lcdif_dat
>
On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 04:01:15PM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:54:40PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:40:51PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > On 7/3/23 18:49, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > > > Short update on this regression.
> > > >
> > > > O
On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:54:40PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:40:51PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On 7/3/23 18:49, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > > Short update on this regression.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 04:19:22PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> >
On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:54:40PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:40:51PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On 7/3/23 18:49, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > > Short update on this regression.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 04:19:22PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> >
On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:40:51PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 7/3/23 18:49, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > Short update on this regression.
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 04:19:22PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > > I also noticed something weird on a colibri imx7s, this is not using SPL,
>
On 7/3/23 18:49, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
Short update on this regression.
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 04:19:22PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
I also noticed something weird on a colibri imx7s, this is not using SPL,
likely something completly different, however given this is new also from rc5 I
Short update on this regression.
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 04:19:22PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> I also noticed something weird on a colibri imx7s, this is not using SPL,
> likely something completly different, however given this is new also from rc5
> I
> thought it's valuable to report:
>
On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 11:05 AM Tom Rini wrote:
> I think this breaks x86, without updating their linker scripts at least.
What about this instead?
--- a/common/spl/spl_legacy.c
+++ b/common/spl/spl_legacy.c
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
static void spl_parse_legacy_validate(uintptr_t start, uintptr_t si
On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 10:51:43AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 10:22 AM Fabio Estevam wrote:
>
> > Should we fix spl_end like this?
>
> Looking at u-boot-spl.map:
>
> 0x009122640x0 common/spl/spl.o
> 0x00912264
On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 10:22 AM Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Should we fix spl_end like this?
Looking at u-boot-spl.map:
0x009122640x0 common/spl/spl.o
0x00912264. = ALIGN (0x4)
0x00912264
Hi Francesco and Marek,
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 11:19 AM Francesco Dolcini wrote:
>
> Hello Marek,
> as briefly discussed off-list it looks like
> commit 77aed22b48ab ("spl: spl_legacy: Add extra address checks") introduces a
> regression on some board/arch, at least colibri and apalis imx6 fails
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 06:58:26PM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 04:19:22PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > I also noticed something weird on a colibri imx7s, this is not using SPL,
> > likely something completly different, however given this is new also from
> > rc5 I
> > t
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 04:19:22PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> Hello Marek,
> as briefly discussed off-list it looks like
> commit 77aed22b48ab ("spl: spl_legacy: Add extra address checks") introduces a
> regression on some board/arch, at least colibri and apalis imx6 fails to boot
> now
>
Hello Marek,
as briefly discussed off-list it looks like
commit 77aed22b48ab ("spl: spl_legacy: Add extra address checks") introduces a
regression on some board/arch, at least colibri and apalis imx6 fails to boot
now
```
Trying to boot from MMC1
SPL: Image overlaps SPL
resetting ...
```
>From a
25 matches
Mail list logo
