Hi Jonas, On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 at 09:50, Jonas Karlman <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Quentin and Simon, > > On 2024-12-13 15:30, Quentin Schulz wrote: > > Hi Jonas, > > > > On 12/13/24 12:57 AM, Jonas Karlman wrote: > >> The u-boot.rom image contain u-boot.img FIT instead of the FIT generated > >> by binman for the u-boot-rockchip.bin image. > >> > >> Change to include the binman generated FIT for the u-boot.rom image. > >> > >> This change result in TF-A being included and the use sha256 instead of > >> crc32 checksum in the u-boot.rom FIT. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Jonas Karlman <[email protected]> > > > > IIRC Simon was fine with removing u-boot.rom support for RK3399 when I > > asked months (probably years?) ago, if that hasn't changed, maybe we > > should now. > > Good to know and fully agree, we should try to remove it now. > > I did a compare between u-boot-rockchip-spi.bin and u-boot.rom and after > this series they are now identical for the full size of > u-boot-rockchip-spi.bin. > > However, the u-boot.rom also has a copy of ~u-boot.bin and a fdtmap > starting at 0x300000. I have no idea if they are used for anything, > if they are it is probably not for bare metal booting (TPL+SPL).
I'm not sure about the extra u-boot.bin, but the fdtmap is so that 'binman ls -i xxx' works. > > Regards, > Jonas > > > > > Especially since the only RK3399 with CONGIG_HAS_ROM set are Bob and Kevin. > > > > @Simon, you said you tested the patch series on them, with which image > > did you do that? Are you still fine with removing the u-boot.rom for RK3399? Yes that's fine. Basically all my testing is in my lab now, which you should be able to use with gitlab. Regards, Simon
