On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 07:56:49AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote: > On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 02:57:42AM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > > On 9/27/23 23:44, Jonas Karlman wrote: > > > spl_board_prepare_for_boot() is not called before jumping/invoking atf, > > > optee, opensbi or linux images. > > > > > > Jump to image at the end of board_init_r() to fix this. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jonas Karlman <jo...@kwiboo.se> > > > --- > > > This patch have dependencies on the following patches: > > > > > > spl: add __noreturn attribute to spl_invoke_opensbi function > > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1827057/ > > > > > > spl: add __noreturn attribute to spl_invoke_atf function > > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1831366/ > > > > > > spl: Drop the switch() statement for OS selection > > > from the "spl: Preparation for Universal Payload" series > > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1839731/ > > > --- > > > common/spl/spl.c | 12 +++++++----- > > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/common/spl/spl.c b/common/spl/spl.c > > > index f7608f14e365..79c39820262a 100644 > > > --- a/common/spl/spl.c > > > +++ b/common/spl/spl.c > > > @@ -647,6 +647,8 @@ void board_init_r(gd_t *dummy1, ulong dummy2) > > > BOOT_DEVICE_NONE, > > > BOOT_DEVICE_NONE, > > > }; > > > + typedef void __noreturn (*jump_to_image_t)(struct spl_image_info *); > > > + jump_to_image_t jump_to_image = &jump_to_image_no_args; > > > struct spl_image_info spl_image; > > > int ret, os; > > > > > > @@ -735,20 +737,20 @@ void board_init_r(gd_t *dummy1, ulong dummy2) > > > } else if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(ATF) && os == > > > IH_OS_ARM_TRUSTED_FIRMWARE) { > > > debug("Jumping to U-Boot via ARM Trusted Firmware\n"); > > > spl_fixup_fdt(spl_image_fdt_addr(&spl_image)); > > > - spl_invoke_atf(&spl_image); > > > + jump_to_image = &spl_invoke_atf; > > > } else if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OPTEE_IMAGE) && os == IH_OS_TEE) { > > > debug("Jumping to U-Boot via OP-TEE\n"); > > > > > > spl_board_prepare_for_optee(spl_image_fdt_addr(&spl_image)); > > > - jump_to_image_optee(&spl_image); > > > + jump_to_image = &jump_to_image_optee; > > > } else if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OPENSBI) && os == IH_OS_OPENSBI) { > > > debug("Jumping to U-Boot via RISC-V OpenSBI\n"); > > > - spl_invoke_opensbi(&spl_image); > > > + jump_to_image = &spl_invoke_opensbi; > > > } else if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OS_BOOT) && os == IH_OS_LINUX) { > > > debug("Jumping to Linux\n"); > > > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SPL_OS_BOOT)) > > > spl_fixup_fdt((void *)SPL_PAYLOAD_ARGS_ADDR); > > > spl_board_prepare_for_linux(); > > > - jump_to_image_linux(&spl_image); > > > + jump_to_image = &jump_to_image_linux; > > > } else { > > > debug("Unsupported OS image.. Jumping > > > nevertheless..\n"); > > > } > > > @@ -788,7 +790,7 @@ void board_init_r(gd_t *dummy1, ulong dummy2) > > > } > > > > > > spl_board_prepare_for_boot(); > > > - jump_to_image_no_args(&spl_image); > > > + jump_to_image(&spl_image); > > > } > > > > > > /* > > > > In SPL we are fighting for every byte of binary size. > > > > What is the impact of this change on the code size? > > > > I would expect that your increasing it; especially if only one of the > > CONFIG_OPTIONS is enabled. > > > > If so, NAK to this patch despite all elegance. > > We aren't _that_ strict, no. And a very quick peek shows that this > seems fine overall. Since you raised the question I'll do a quick > world build but socfpga_agilex_vab (as a config I had size change > results for in front of me for something else) shrank by 4 bytes with > just the prerequsites and this patch applied.
Yes, this generally is a small shrink or a small growth and fine. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature