Hi Tom, Yea, I'm not sure if uncompressed ARM32 would work, but I don't believe it was ever working to begin with... as bootz_setup is being called right now ( @ https://source.denx.de/u-boot/u-boot/-/blob/master/common/spl/spl.c#L366 )
My intent was for SPL_OS_BOOT_UNCOMPRESSED to only be used for platforms which need booti_setup (ARM64, ...). So... I could add a dependency on ARM64 in the config option or I could remove the option altogether and let the booti_setup fail and fallback to bootz_setup. Would either of those work for you? Sincerely, Nathan On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 10:11 AM Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 07:58:00PM -0500, Nathan Barrett-Morrison wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > While trying to bring up Falcon Mode boot on an ARM64 board, I discovered > > that there is no path which allows you to use an uncompressed kernel > image > > (booti). I've added this path and attached the relevant patch. > > > > I've made this a separate if/else CONFIG option instead of allowing both > > bootz+booti paths to coexist, as it seems unlikely to me that there would > > be such a board which needs both. Most architectures use either bootz or > > booti, but not both. > > > > Sincerely, > > Nathan Barrett-Morrison > > > From d5542ccc2d4f81ac0442be8ca772a99e1a13b6dd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Nathan Barrett-Morrison <nathan.morri...@timesys.com> > > Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2022 19:42:10 -0500 > > Subject: [PATCH] Add in the ability to load and boot an uncompressed > > kernel image during the Falcon Mode boot sequence. This is required for > > architectures which do not support compressed kernel image booting > (i.e., > > ARM64) > > > > Signed-off-by: Nathan Barrett-Morrison <nathan.morri...@timesys.com> > > Cc: Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> > > Cc: Aneesh V <ane...@ti.com> > > --- > > arch/arm/lib/Makefile | 2 +- > > common/spl/Kconfig | 6 ++++++ > > common/spl/spl.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ > > 3 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/lib/Makefile b/arch/arm/lib/Makefile > > index c48e1f622d..24c9e3c1e5 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/lib/Makefile > > +++ b/arch/arm/lib/Makefile > > @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_CMD_BOOTZ) += bootm.o zimage.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_SYS_L2_PL310) += cache-pl310.o > > else > > obj-$(CONFIG_$(SPL_TPL_)FRAMEWORK) += spl.o > > -obj-$(CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK) += zimage.o > > +obj-$(CONFIG_SPL_FRAMEWORK) += zimage.o image.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT) += bootm-fdt.o > > endif > > ifdef CONFIG_ARM64 > > diff --git a/common/spl/Kconfig b/common/spl/Kconfig > > index 4a739a7421..6d2ddddc9f 100644 > > --- a/common/spl/Kconfig > > +++ b/common/spl/Kconfig > > @@ -917,6 +917,12 @@ config SYS_OS_BASE > > Specify the address, where the OS image is found, which > > gets booted. > > > > +config SPL_OS_BOOT_UNCOMPRESSED > > + bool "Use uncompressed kernel image alongside Falcon Mode" > > + depends on SPL_SPI_LOAD > > + help > > + Use an uncompressed kernel image to boot. This is targetting > > + architectures which use booti instead of bootz (i.e, ARM64). > > endif # SPL_OS_BOOT > > We shouldn't need another CONFIG option here, and this would then I > believe fail to boot uncompressed arm32 images. The real problem I > think is that the code assumed bootm/bootz but needs to instead be more > explicit in checking / supporting each and then also yes, adding booti > support. Following up with also supporting compressed Images may or may > not take additional logic, I'm not sure off-hand. > > -- > Tom >