On Sun, 26 Jan 2020 01:40:13 +0100 Soeren Moch <sm...@web.de> wrote: > > Ahh ok, now I understand. That probably explains the repeated size > > issues. > Why? With SPL+u-boot proper it would be even worse, since then there > is a gap between SPL and u-boot, u-boot starts at higher address in > eMMC, and it would not be smaller. And this 2-stage boot would break > the documented u-boot update procedure, since we have to flash 2 > files then. I assumed that in some conditions, the bootrom could load only the SPL in sram. Once loaded, the SPL would initialize the RAM, detect the boot media, and fetch u-boot.img from it, and execute it.
I also hoped the the SPL would have been significantly smaller than the current u-boot.imx image. In the meantime, I'll send a v2 with some additional patches to reduce the size of the resulting u-boot.imx. Denis.
pgpBSaD6X6Gg5.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
