Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:15:46 +0100 > From: Maxime Ripard > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 01:55:51AM +, Andr=E9 Przywara wrote: > > On 19/12/17 15:24, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:41:17PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > >>> Date:

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 01:55:51AM +, André Przywara wrote: > On 19/12/17 15:24, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:41:17PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > >>> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 14:12:02 +0100 > >>> From: Maxime Ripard > >>> > >>> On Tue,

Re: [U-Boot] fs/fat: device not booting since conversion to dir iterators

Hi Simon, >From: s...@google.com [mailto:s...@google.com] On Behalf Of Simon Glass >Sent: Dienstag, 19. Dezember 2017 16:42 >Hi Patrick, > >On 13 December 2017 at 03:15, Patrick Brünn >wrote: >>>From: Patrick Brünn >>>Sent: Donnerstag, 30. November 2017 12:22 >>> >>>Since

[U-Boot] [PATCH] rockchp: dts: rk3399-evb: support boot from sd-card

Enable sdmmc node in SPL and add it to boot order. Signed-off-by: Kever Yang --- arch/arm/dts/rk3399-evb.dts | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/rk3399-evb.dts b/arch/arm/dts/rk3399-evb.dts index 0e5d8d7..f0567c9 100644 ---

[U-Boot] [PATCH RESEND v2 3/3] arm64: layerscape: Move CONFIG_HAS_FSL_DR_USB to Kconfig

Rename to USB_EHCI_FSL, use Kconfig to select ehci accordingly. Signed-off-by: Ran Wang --- Change in v2: None drivers/usb/host/Kconfig | 6 ++ include/configs/ls1012aqds.h | 11 --- include/configs/ls1021aqds.h | 11 ---

[U-Boot] [PATCH RESEND v2 2/3] usb: ehci: fsl: Fix some compile warnings.

When enable CONFIG_HAS_FSL_DR_USB, we might encounter below compile warning, apply this patch can fix it: drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:109:4: warning: cast from pointer to integer of different size [-Wpointer-to-int-cast] ((u32)hccr + HC_LENGTH(ehci_readl(>cr_capbase))); ^

[U-Boot] [PATCH RESEND v2 1/3] armv8: ls1012a: Add USB 2.0 controller phy type for ls1012aqds board

Without this propertiy, U-Boot will pop warning of 'USB phy type not defined' when select CONFIG_HAS_FSL_DR_USB. Signed-off-by: Ran Wang --- Change in v2: None arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1012a-qds.dtsi | 5 + 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) diff --git

[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 3/3] arm64: layerscape: Move CONFIG_HAS_FSL_DR_USB to Kconfig

Rename to USB_EHCI_FSL, use Kconfig to select ehci accordingly. Signed-off-by: Ran Wang --- drivers/usb/host/Kconfig | 6 ++ include/configs/ls1012aqds.h | 11 --- include/configs/ls1021aqds.h | 11 --- include/configs/ls1021atwr.h | 20

[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/3] usb: ehci: fsl: Fix some compile warnings.

When enable CONFIG_HAS_FSL_DR_USB, we might encounter below compile warning, apply this patch can fix it: drivers/usb/host/ehci-fsl.c:109:4: warning: cast from pointer to integer of different size [-Wpointer-to-int-cast] ((u32)hccr + HC_LENGTH(ehci_readl(>cr_capbase))); ^

[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/3] armv8: ls1012a: Add USB 2.0 controller phy type for ls1012aqds board

Without this propertiy, U-Boot will pop warning of 'USB phy type not defined' when select CONFIG_HAS_FSL_DR_USB. Signed-off-by: Ran Wang --- arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1012a-qds.dtsi | 5 + 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/fsl-ls1012a-qds.dtsi

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On 19/12/17 15:36, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:27:57PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > Removing those options make the u-boot.itb binary size going from > 516kB to 478kB, making it functional again *and* allowing us to enable > the DT overlays that seem way more

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On 19/12/17 15:24, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:41:17PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: >>> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 14:12:02 +0100 >>> From: Maxime Ripard >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:28:20AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: So even though

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] usb: ehci: fsl: Fix some compile warnings.

Hi Marek, > -Original Message- > From: Marek Vasut [mailto:ma...@denx.de] > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 7:17 PM > > On 12/19/2017 08:33 AM, Ran Wang wrote: > > Commit message explaining what "some" means is missing. > OK, will explain it in v2 > > Signed-off-by: Ran Wang

[U-Boot] [PATCH 4/4] ARM: tegra: use CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_BSS_OFFSET

From: Stephen Warren Enable CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_BSS_OFFSET for all 64-bit Tegra boards. Place the stack/... 512KiB from the end of the U-Boot binary. This should be plenty to accommodate the current DTBs (max 64 KiB), early malloc region (6KiB), stack usage, and plenty of

[U-Boot] [PATCH 3/4] ARMv8: Allow dynamic early stack pointer

From: Stephen Warren U-Boot typically uses a hard-coded value for the stack pointer before relocation. Implement option SYS_INIT_SP_BSS_OFFSET to instead calculate the initial SP at run-time. This is useful to avoid hard-coding addresses into U-Boot, so that can be loaded and

[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] ARM: tegra: don't use CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE when no SPL

From: Stephen Warren 64-bit Tegra don't use SPL, and soon won't define CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE when building. Fix the binman .dts file so that it doesn't use undefined values. Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren --- arch/arm/dts/tegra-u-boot.dtsi | 15

[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/4] ARM: tegra: remove SPL config for non-SPL SoCs

From: Stephen Warren No 64-bit Tegra uses SPL. Remove various unused definitions from config headers. Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren --- include/configs/tegra-common.h| 2 ++ include/configs/tegra186-common.h | 5 -

Re: [U-Boot] Socfpga: configure FPGA to SDRAM interface without reprogramming the FPGA

Am 18.12.2017 um 22:05 schrieb Marek Vasut: > On 12/18/2017 09:44 PM, Jan Siegmund wrote: Hi Marek, >> Hi all, > > Hi, > >> Here is another question on the FPGA to SDRAM interface of the Cyclone V SoC. >> Is is possible to configure the the interface in U-Boot or SPL, > > What is "the

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 16:24:59 +0100 > From: Maxime Ripard > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:41:17PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > > Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 14:12:02 +0100 > > > From: Maxime Ripard > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 05,

Re: [U-Boot] Please pull u-boot-dm

Hi Tom, On 19 December 2017 at 14:30, Tom Rini wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:27:06PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: >> Hi Tom, >> >> On 19 December 2017 at 14:19, Tom Rini wrote: >> > >> > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 06:30:48AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: >> >

Re: [U-Boot] Please pull u-boot-dm

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:27:06PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On 19 December 2017 at 14:19, Tom Rini wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 06:30:48AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > Here is the remainder of my queue for u-boot-dm,

Re: [U-Boot] Please pull u-boot-dm

Hi Tom, On 19 December 2017 at 14:19, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 06:30:48AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > > > Hi Tom, > > > > Here is the remainder of my queue for u-boot-dm, including the test > > patches that were dropped. If any of the test patches cause a

Re: [U-Boot] Please pull u-boot-dm

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 06:30:48AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > Here is the remainder of my queue for u-boot-dm, including the test > patches that were dropped. If any of the test patches cause a problem > with your workflow, please let me know. If you would rather hold these > off

Re: [U-Boot] efi_loader: Setup logical_partition media information

On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 07:22:33PM +0100, Emmanuel Vadot wrote: > When adding a partition, set the logical_partition member in the media > structure as mandated by the UEFI spec. > > Signed-off-by: Emmanuel Vadot > Reviewed-by: Heinrich Schuchardt Applied

Re: [U-Boot] Pull request: u-boot-sunxi/master

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 05:17:21PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote: > Hi Tom, > > Please pull this PR. > > thanks! > Jagan. > > The following changes since commit b6251db8c3f0de605b4cd6f15a00fc7dd19cda63: > > Kconfig: Introduce USE_BOOTCOMMAND and migrate BOOTCOMMAND (2017-11-17 > 16:37:26 -0500)

Re: [U-Boot] Pull request: u-boot-spi/master

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 05:54:21PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote: > Hi Tom, > > Please pull this PR. > > thanks! > Jagan. > > The following changes since commit 16fa2eb95172e63820ee5f3d4052f3362a6de84e: > > ARM: dra7: Kconfig: Add thermal configs for dra7xx and am57xx (2017-11-21 > 08:03:39

[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/1] efi_loader: correct EFI_BLOCK_IO_PROTOCOL definitions

Add the revision constants. Depending on the revision additional fields are needed in the media descriptor. Use efi_uintn_t for number of bytes to read or write. Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt --- include/efi_api.h | 10 -- lib/efi_loader/efi_disk.c | 8

[U-Boot] [PATCH] TCP and wget implementation v3

>I'd like to see the shim and all changes to existing stack as a >separate patch to make review simpler. In this patch. >Also please make TCP and wget into 2 other separate patches. Yes, following. > Yes it should... you could have wget "selects" tcp. Please send a "how to" example. >> The

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] musb: sunxi: Use base address from device tree

On 12/19/2017 05:04 PM, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 11:56 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: >> On 12/12/2017 08:24 AM, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: >>> Now that the musb sunxi glue driver is completely device model / device >>> tree driven, we should use the base address from the

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] armv8: ls2085a: Update README file for NAND boot

On 12/07/2017 02:38 PM, York Sun wrote: > Update README file to note LS2088A and LS1088A don't support booting > from NAND flash. > > Signed-off-by: York Sun > --- > Applied to fsl-qoriq master. York ___ U-Boot mailing list

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] armv8: ls1046aqds: Adjust IFC timing for NOR flash

On 12/12/2017 11:41 AM, York Sun wrote: > Increase setup, assertion and hold time related to chip-select signal. > Additional delay is needed for the signal to propogate through FPGA. > This adjustment slightly increase the read and write cycle but has no > impact on burst read or write. > >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] armv8: ls2080a: Increase load image len for NAND boot

On 12/07/2017 02:38 PM, York Sun wrote: > From: Yuan Yao > > Again the image size increases and the length needs to be adjusted. > > Signed-off-by: York Sun > --- > Fixed author information.Applied to fsl-qoriq master. York

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] musb: sunxi: Use base address from device tree

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 11:56 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 12/12/2017 08:24 AM, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: >> Now that the musb sunxi glue driver is completely device model / device >> tree driven, we should use the base address from the device tree, >> instead of hard-coding it in the

Re: [U-Boot] [v4 2/3] armv8: ls1012ardb: add more board version information

On 12/07/2017 11:54 PM, Yangbo Lu wrote: > Add LS1012ARDB RevC/RevC1/RevC2/RevD/RevE information and > detect it when u-boot starts up. > > Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu > --- > Changes for v4: > - Added this patch. Applied to fsl-qoriq master. Thanks. York

Re: [U-Boot] [v4 3/3] armv8: ls1012ardb: support hwconfig for eSDHC1 enabling

On 12/07/2017 11:54 PM, Yangbo Lu wrote: > I2C reading for DIP switch setting is not reliable for LS1012ARDB > RevD and later versions. This patch is to add hwconfig support to > enable/disable eSDHC1 manually for these boards. Also drop 'status' > fix-up for eSDHC0 and leave it as it is. It

Re: [U-Boot] [v4 1/3] armv8: ls1012ardb: clean up definitions for I2C IO expanders

On 12/07/2017 11:54 PM, Yangbo Lu wrote: > This patch is to clean up definitions for I2C IO expanders. > The value 0x10 of __SW_BOOT_EMU is wrong. It should be 0x2. > Fixed it in this patch. > > Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu > --- > Changes for v4: > - Added this patch.

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] board/ls2080a, ls1088a: Add check for mc-dpl applied in fdt

On 12/06/2017 09:40 PM, Yogesh Gaur wrote: > In fdt_fixup_board_enet() perform fdt fixup, fdt_status_okay, only when > both MC is applied and DPL is deployed. > Else returns failure, fdt_status_fail(). > > This patch add this check for > - LS2080A/LS2088A boards: in dir ls2080a, ls2080ardb and

Re: [U-Boot] [v4 1/2] armv8: ls1043a/ls2080a: check SoC by device ID

On 12/03/2017 08:37 PM, Wenbin song wrote: > Check LS1043A/LS2080a by device ID without using personality ID to > determine revision number. This check applies to all various > personalities of the same SoC family. > > Signed-off-by: Wenbin Song > --- > Changes for V1: >

Re: [U-Boot] [v4 2/2] armv8: layerscape: Discard the needless cpu nodes

On 12/03/2017 08:37 PM, Wenbin song wrote: > Using "cpu_pos_mask()" function to detect the real online cpus, > and discard the needless cpu nodes on kernel dts. > > Signed-off-by: Wenbin Song > --- > Changes for v1: > Remove the config option. >

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v3] arm64: ls1012afrdm: Add distro boot support

On 11/30/2017 03:14 AM, Rajesh Bhagat wrote: > Include common config_distro_defaults.h and config_distro_bootcmd.h > for u-boot enviroments to support automatical distro boot which > scan boot.scr from external storage devices(e.g. SD and USB) > and execute autoboot script. > > Signed-off-by:

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5] arm64: ls1012ardb: Add distro boot support

On 11/30/2017 03:14 AM, Rajesh Bhagat wrote: > Include common config_distro_defaults.h and config_distro_bootcmd.h > for u-boot enviroments to support automatical distro boot which > scan boot.scr from external storage devices(e.g. SD and USB) > and execute autoboot script. > > Signed-off-by:

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] armv8: ls1088ardb: support force SDHC mode by hwconfig

On 11/26/2017 11:59 PM, Yangbo Lu wrote: > The BRDCFG5[SPISDHC] register field of Qixis device is used > to control SPI and SDHC signal routing. > > 10 = Force SDHC Mode > - SPI_CS[0] is routed to CPLD for SDHC_VS use. > - SPI_CS[1] is unused. > - SPI_CS[2:3] are routed to the TDMRiser

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 9:06 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:27:57PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: >> >>> Removing those options make the u-boot.itb binary size going from >> >>> 516kB to 478kB, making it functional again *and* allowing us to

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 04:36:13PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:27:57PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > > >>> Removing those options make the u-boot.itb binary size going from > > >>> 516kB to 478kB, making it functional again *and* allowing us to enable > > >>> the DT

Re: [U-Boot] How to re-use the driver data for pre-reloc in post-reloc driver

+Tom, Wolfgang, Masahiro Hi Kever, On 12 December 2017 at 21:35, Kever Yang wrote: > Hi Simon, > > This is not the topic about disable the relocate feature in U-Boot > proper. > > My target is re-use kernel dtb in U-Boot and U-Boot can work properly even > if >

Re: [U-Boot] [RFC] Design of UEFI drivers

Hi Heinrich, On 12 December 2017 at 12:57, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > 2a92080d8c4 [PATCH] efi_loader: add file/filesys support > implemented the EFI_SIMPLE_FILE_SYSTEM_PROTOCOL. > > Unfortunately it assumes that the available media are constant. > > iPXE offers the

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] disk: part: scan the disk if the part_type is unknow

Hi Kever, On 13 December 2017 at 23:39, Kever Yang wrote: > We can get the new part table when we write a new partition table to > a blank disk with this patch, or else we have to reset the board > to get new partition table. > > Signed-off-by: Kever Yang

Re: [U-Boot] [ANN] U-Boot v2018.01-rc1 released

Hi Tom, On 7 December 2017 at 06:16, Tom Rini wrote: > On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 04:49:49AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: >> Hi Tom, >> >> On 4 December 2017 at 16:33, Tom Rini wrote: >> > Hey all, >> > >> > So it's release day and I've put up v2018.01-rc1.

Re: [U-Boot] fs/fat: device not booting since conversion to dir iterators

Hi Patrick, On 13 December 2017 at 03:15, Patrick Brünn wrote: >>From: Patrick Brünn >>Sent: Donnerstag, 30. November 2017 12:22 >> >>Since commit 8eafae209c35932d9a6560809c55ee4641534236 >>my mx53cx9020_defconfig stopped booting. >>... >>It seems important to read into

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/1] dm: fix typo falback

On 17 December 2017 at 10:19, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > %s/falback/fallback/g > > Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt > --- > include/dm/uclass.h | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) Reviewed-by: Simon Glass

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] musb: sunxi: Use base address from device tree

On 12 December 2017 at 00:24, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > Now that the musb sunxi glue driver is completely device model / device > tree driven, we should use the base address from the device tree, > instead of hard-coding it in the source code. > > Fixes: 3a61b080acee ("musb: sunxi:

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] power: tps65910: replace error() by pr_err()

On 18 December 2017 at 07:38, Felix Brack wrote: > The patch replaces the former error() by the new pr_err(). > This makes the TPS65910 driver conform to Masahiro's patch > 'treewide:replace with error() with pr_err()' introduced > October 2017. > > Signed-off-by: Felix Brack

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] BCM283x ALT5 function for JTAG pins

On 18 December 2017 at 01:13, wrote: > From: Henry Zhang > > BCM2835 ARM Peripherals doc shows gpio pins 4, 5, 6, 12 and 13 carry altenate > function, ALT5 for ARM JTAG > > Signed-off-by: Henry Zhang > --- >

Re: [U-Boot] [RESEND PATCH 2/2] configs: stm32f746-disco: enable MMC related flags

On 12 December 2017 at 02:15, wrote: > From: Patrice Chotard > > STM32F469-disco embeds an arm_pl180 mmc IP, so > enable CMD_MMC, DM_MMC and ARM_PL180_MMCI flags. > > Also enables all filesystem command related flags : > _ CMD_EXT2 > _

Re: [U-Boot] Swig now required to build U-Boot?

Hi Tom, On 11 December 2017 at 18:51, Tom Rini wrote: > On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 04:16:41PM -0800, Sergey Kubushyn wrote: >> On Fri, 8 Dec 2017, Simon Glass wrote: >> >> >Hi Stephen, >> > >> >On 8 December 2017 at 16:28, Stephen Warren wrote: >>

Re: [U-Boot] [RESEND PATCH 1/2] ARM: DTS: stm32: add MMC nodes for stm32f746-disco and stm32f769-disco

On 12 December 2017 at 02:14, wrote: > From: Patrice Chotard > > Add DT nodes to enable ARM_PL180_MMCI IP support for STM32F746 > and STM32F769 discovery boards > > There is a hardware issue on these boards, it misses a pullup on the GPIO line >

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:27:57PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > >>> Removing those options make the u-boot.itb binary size going from > >>> 516kB to 478kB, making it functional again *and* allowing us to enable > >>> the DT overlays that seem way more important than any feature > >>> mentionned

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] sunxi: imply CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT_OVERLAY

On 19/12/17 13:51, Maxime Ripard wrote: On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 05:12:00PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote: On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Andre Heider wrote: fdt overlay support is useful for all sunxi boards, enable per default and remove it from sunxi defconfigs.

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:41:17PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 14:12:02 +0100 > > From: Maxime Ripard > > > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:28:20AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > > > So even though the actual u-boot.bin for 64-bit boards

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] am335x_hs_evm: Trim options in SPL to reduce binary size

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 08:54:25AM -0600, Andrew F. Davis wrote: > On 12/16/2017 10:04 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > > The am335x_hs_evm runs into size constraint problems at times with > > various toolchains as changes come in due to the config have a large > > number of options in SPL (to showcase what

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] am335x_hs_evm: Trim options in SPL to reduce binary size

On 12/16/2017 10:04 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > The am335x_hs_evm runs into size constraint problems at times with > various toolchains as changes come in due to the config have a large > number of options in SPL (to showcase what is possible) while also > having rather constrained binary limits. Gain

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 10:41:23PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > > All these trimming(if it fits) seems to be nice for now, but what if > > once driver-model MMC, reset, pinctrl, clk, regulator are IN? I guess a better question would be: what are we doing to fix an issue we had in a release

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 10:38 PM, Jagan Teki wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 7:57 PM, Andre Przywara > wrote: >> Hi Maxime, >> >> On 19/12/17 14:20, Maxime Ripard wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 01:38:59PM +, Andre Przywara wrote:

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

Hi, On 19/12/17 14:38, Jagan Teki wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 7:57 PM, Andre Przywara > wrote: >> Hi Maxime, >> >> On 19/12/17 14:20, Maxime Ripard wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 01:38:59PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: Hi Maxime, thanks for having

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 7:57 PM, Andre Przywara wrote: > Hi Maxime, > > On 19/12/17 14:20, Maxime Ripard wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 01:38:59PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: >>> Hi Maxime, >>> >>> thanks for having a look! >>> >>> On 19/12/17 13:12, Maxime Ripard

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

Hi Maxime, On 19/12/17 14:20, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 01:38:59PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Hi Maxime, >> >> thanks for having a look! >> >> On 19/12/17 13:12, Maxime Ripard wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:28:20AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: So even though

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:22:59PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > Hi, > > On 19/12/17 14:20, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 03:09:52PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > >> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 08:30:31AM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > >>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:26:40PM +0100, Maxime

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

Hi, On 19/12/17 14:20, Tom Rini wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 03:09:52PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 08:30:31AM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:26:40PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: 1;5002;0c On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 08:15:31AM -0500, Tom

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 03:09:52PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 08:30:31AM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:26:40PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > 1;5002;0c > > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 08:15:31AM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 01:38:59PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > Hi Maxime, > > thanks for having a look! > > On 19/12/17 13:12, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:28:20AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > >> So even though the actual u-boot.bin for 64-bit boards is still somewhat

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

Hi, On 19/12/17 13:51, Mark Kettenis wrote: >> From: Andre Przywara >> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 13:38:59 + >> >> Hi Maxime, >> >> thanks for having a look! >> >> On 19/12/17 13:12, Maxime Ripard wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:28:20AM +, Andre Przywara wrote:

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:28:03PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: > On 12/19/2017 02:12 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > - VIDEO_BPP8, VIDEO_BPP16 > > - VIDEO_ANSI > > - SHA256 > > - LZMA > > > > Removing those options make the u-boot.itb binary size going from > > 516kB to 478kB, making it

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 08:30:31AM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:26:40PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > 1;5002;0c > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 08:15:31AM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:12:02PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

> From: Andre Przywara > Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 13:38:59 + > > Hi Maxime, > > thanks for having a look! > > On 19/12/17 13:12, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:28:20AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > >> So even though the actual u-boot.bin for

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 14:12:02 +0100 > From: Maxime Ripard > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:28:20AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > > So even though the actual u-boot.bin for 64-bit boards is still somewhat > > below the limit (~480KB), adding the ATF image

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

Hi Maxime, thanks for having a look! On 19/12/17 13:12, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:28:20AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: >> So even though the actual u-boot.bin for 64-bit boards is still somewhat >> below the limit (~480KB), adding the ATF image (~32KB) pushes it over >>

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:28:03PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: > On 12/19/2017 02:12 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote: > >On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:28:20AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > >>So even though the actual u-boot.bin for 64-bit boards is still somewhat > >>below the limit (~480KB), adding the

[U-Boot] Please pull u-boot-dm

Hi Tom, Here is the remainder of my queue for u-boot-dm, including the test patches that were dropped. If any of the test patches cause a problem with your workflow, please let me know. If you would rather hold these off until next release that's fine too. I have had to leave out the live-tree

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:26:40PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > 1;5002;0c > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 08:15:31AM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:12:02PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:28:20AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > > > > So even though the

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On 12/19/2017 02:12 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote: On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:28:20AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: So even though the actual u-boot.bin for 64-bit boards is still somewhat below the limit (~480KB), adding the ATF image (~32KB) pushes it over the edge. So since v2017.11 u-boot.itb is

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

1;5002;0c On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 08:15:31AM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:12:02PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:28:20AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > > > So even though the actual u-boot.bin for 64-bit boards is still somewhat > > > below the

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3][v3] arm: Add support of updating dts before fix-up

On 12 December 2017 at 10:56, York Sun wrote: > On 11/23/2017 03:22 AM, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote: >> "ethernet" node fix-up for device tree happens before Linux boot. >> >> There can be requirement of updating "ethernet" node even before >> fix-up. So, add support of updating

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] [v3] boards: ls1046ardb: disable unavailable "ethernet" node in dts

On 12 December 2017 at 10:56, York Sun wrote: > On 11/23/2017 03:22 AM, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote: >> Linux device tree contains "ethernet" node for all possible >> interface supported by SoC i.e. LS1046A. >> >> It is not necessary for a SerDes protocol to support all possible >>

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 4/7] test: Run buildman tests

On 26 November 2017 at 20:25, Simon Glass wrote: > Update the test script to run the buildman tests also. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > test/run | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) Applied to u-boot-dm

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/7] test: Run binman tests

On 26 November 2017 at 20:25, Simon Glass wrote: > Update the test script to run the binman tests also. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: > - Adjust PYTHONPATH for new locations > > test/run | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 5/7] test: Run dtoc tests

On 26 November 2017 at 20:25, Simon Glass wrote: > Update the test script to run the dtoc tests also. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: > - Adjust PYTHONPATH for new locations > > test/run | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 3/7] test: Run patman tests

On 26 November 2017 at 20:25, Simon Glass wrote: > Update the test script to run the patman tests also. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > test/run | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) Applied to u-boot-dm

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3][v3] common: Fix-up MAC addr in dts by fetching env variable serially

On 12 December 2017 at 10:56, York Sun wrote: > On 11/23/2017 03:22 AM, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote: >> The MAC addresses get fixed in the device tree for "ethernet" nodes >> is by using trailing number behind "ethernet" found in "/aliases". >> It may not be necessary for the

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/7] doc: FIT image: fix incorrect examples of DT node unit address

On 18 December 2017 at 21:24, Simon Glass wrote: > On 3 December 2017 at 19:05, Andre Przywara wrote: >> The DT spec demands a unit-address of a node name to match the "reg" >> property in that node. Newer dtc versions will throw warnings if this is >>

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/7] doc: FIT image: fix incorrect description of DT node unit address

On 18 December 2017 at 21:24, Simon Glass wrote: > On 3 December 2017 at 19:05, Andre Przywara wrote: >> The DT spec demands a unit-address in a node name to match the "reg" >> property in that node. Newer dtc versions will throw warnings if this is >>

Re: [U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:12:02PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:28:20AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > > So even though the actual u-boot.bin for 64-bit boards is still somewhat > > below the limit (~480KB), adding the ATF image (~32KB) pushes it over > > the edge. So

[U-Boot] ARM64 Allwinner Binary Size

On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:28:20AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > So even though the actual u-boot.bin for 64-bit boards is still somewhat > below the limit (~480KB), adding the ATF image (~32KB) pushes it over > the edge. So since v2017.11 u-boot.itb is already too big for the > traditional MMC

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 6/7] travis.yml: Run tests for tools

Run tests for the Python tools used by U-Boot. Signed-off-by: Simon Glass --- Changes in v2: None .travis.yml | 15 +++ 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) Applied to u-boot-dm thanks! ___ U-Boot mailing list

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 7/7] binman: Run code coverage tests

Binman has 100% test coverage for the code as it is at present. To encourage it to stay that way, run the code-coverage test as part of the normal U-Boot tests. This is RFC because it requires the Python code coverage tools to be available. Signed-off-by: Simon Glass ---

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 7/7] armv8: secure firmware: fix incorrect unit address in node name

Hi Andre, On 3 December 2017 at 19:05, Andre Przywara wrote: > The DT spec demands a unit-address in a node name to match the "reg" > property in that node. Newer dtc versions will throw warnings if this is > not the case. > Remove the unit address from the config node

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 4/7] fix incorrect usage of DT node unit address in comments

On 3 December 2017 at 19:05, Andre Przywara wrote: > The DT spec demands a unit-address in a node name to match the "reg" > property in that node. Newer dtc versions will throw warnings if this is > not the case. > Fix all occurences in the tree where node names were

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 5/7] sunxi: arm64: correct usage of DT node address in FIT generation

Hi Simon, thanks for going through this! On 19/12/17 04:24, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Andre, > > On 3 December 2017 at 19:05, Andre Przywara wrote: >> The DT spec demands a unit-address in a node name to match the "reg" >> property in that node. Newer dtc versions will

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 5/7] sunxi: arm64: correct usage of DT node address in FIT generation

Hi Simon, thanks for going through this! On 19/12/17 04:24, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Andre, > > On 3 December 2017 at 19:05, Andre Przywara wrote: >> The DT spec demands a unit-address in a node name to match the "reg" >> property in that node. Newer dtc versions will

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 6/7] tools: fix incorrect usage of DT node unit address

On 3 December 2017 at 19:05, Andre Przywara wrote: > The DT spec demands a unit-address in a node name to match the "reg" > property in that node. Newer dtc versions will throw warnings if this is > not the case. > Correct the generated unit names when U-Boot's mkimage

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/7] doc: fix incorrect usage of DT node unit address

On 3 December 2017 at 19:05, Andre Przywara wrote: > The DT spec demands a unit-address in a node name to match the "reg" > property in that node. Newer dtc versions will throw warnings if this is > not the case. > Fix all occurences in various documentation files where

  1   2   >