>
> 1) It seems the BACK_TO_BROM feature is broken. It doesn't boot using the
>> 2016.09. I'm afraid I don't have the time to track it down.
>>
> It works fine on my evb, do you flash the image correctly? it's different
> with the way you don't use BACK_TO_BROM.
>
Well, I tested again on the
Hi Sandy,
On 09/19/2016 09:33 PM, Sandy Patterson wrote:
Hi Kever and Vagrant,
I tested this patch on my rock2 board against 2016.09. (I didn't have
my board with me over the weekend)
Thanks for your test and for your log, my source code do have one bug
and I have fix and upload the V2
Hi Kever and Vagrant,
I tested this patch on my rock2 board against 2016.09. (I didn't have my
board with me over the weekend)
1) It seems the BACK_TO_BROM feature is broken. It doesn't boot using the
2016.09. I'm afraid I don't have the time to track it down.
2) It seems the SPL is still small
On 2016-09-15, Sandy Patterson wrote:
> An alternative for you might be to disable OF_PLATDATA for firefly and
> enable BACK_TO_BROM.
I wasn't able to successfully build with OF_PLATDATA disabled; sounds
like there are more patches needed for firefly for that to work.
> You may not be getting
Hi Sandy Patterson,
On 09/15/2016 08:00 PM, Sandy Patterson wrote:
Hi Kever,
With regards to the SPL size issue, I believe that the
CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SPL_BACK_TO_BROM option should work with
all of the rk3288 boards. So if your patch causes unbootable SPL's because
they're too big, then you
Hi Kever,
With regards to the SPL size issue, I believe that the
CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SPL_BACK_TO_BROM option should work with
all of the rk3288 boards. So if your patch causes unbootable SPL's because
they're too big, then you should probably enable the BROM macro (and
disable OF_PLATDATA).
Firefly
hi Vagrant,
On 2016年09月11日 03:01, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
On 2016-09-10, Ziyuan Xu wrote:
On 2016年09月09日 03:28, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
On 2016-09-08, Kever Yang wrote:
The rk3288 spl size is very close to 32KB while the rk3288 bootrom
has the limitation of maximum size of SPL is 32KB.
On 2016-09-10, Ziyuan Xu wrote:
> On 2016年09月09日 03:28, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
>> On 2016-09-08, Kever Yang wrote:
>>> The rk3288 spl size is very close to 32KB while the rk3288 bootrom
>>> has the limitation of maximum size of SPL is 32KB. After apply this
>>> patch, the SPL size will exceed
hi Vagrant,
On 2016年09月09日 03:28, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
On 2016-09-08, Kever Yang wrote:
The rk3288 spl size is very close to 32KB while the rk3288 bootrom
has the limitation of maximum size of SPL is 32KB. After apply this
patch, the SPL size will exceed 32KB if we do not enable macro
On 2016-09-08, Kever Yang wrote:
> The rk3288 spl size is very close to 32KB while the rk3288 bootrom
> has the limitation of maximum size of SPL is 32KB. After apply this
> patch, the SPL size will exceed 32KB if we do not enable macro
> CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SPL_BACK_TO_BROM.
>
> I think this patch is
The rk3288 spl size is very close to 32KB while the rk3288 bootrom
has the limitation of maximum size of SPL is 32KB. After apply this
patch, the SPL size will exceed 32KB if we do not enable macro
CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_SPL_BACK_TO_BROM.
I think this patch is usful and should be go upstream other than
11 matches
Mail list logo
