Hi,
On Wed, 5 Jul 2023 at 09:35, Tom Rini wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 02:13:01PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> > On 04/07/2023 14:04, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> >
> > > The boards that do not check the return value might start to behave
> > > wrongly without an obvious error to help the
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 02:13:01PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> On 04/07/2023 14:04, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
>
> > The boards that do not check the return value might start to behave
> > wrongly without an obvious error to help the debugging.
>
> Yes, the current implementation of
On 04/07/2023 14:04, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
The boards that do not check the return value might start to behave
wrongly without an obvious error to help the debugging.
Yes, the current implementation of fdt_status_disabled() is fragile, but
there's not so much we can do for the upcoming
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 12:57:34PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 12:12 PM Francesco Dolcini
> wrote:
>
> > Now that the situation is pretty much clear I am not overly concerned for
> > colibri-imx7s.
> >
> > Do we consider this something to be worried about for other
On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 12:12 PM Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> Now that the situation is pretty much clear I am not overly concerned for
> colibri-imx7s.
>
> Do we consider this something to be worried about for other boards?
There are only three boards that check the return value from
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 05:23:03PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:14:57AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 05:12:42PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:39:59AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> > > > Then for the next
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:14:57AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 05:12:42PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:39:59AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> > > Then for the next cycle, we should plan on adding this
> > > fdt_increase_size() into the common
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:09:06AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:39:59AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> > Then for the next cycle, we should plan on adding this
> > fdt_increase_size() into the common fdt_status_disabled().
>
> I'm a little leary of generic changes here
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 05:12:42PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:39:59AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> > Then for the next cycle, we should plan on adding this
> > fdt_increase_size() into the common fdt_status_disabled().
> >
> > Does it work?
>
> Now that the
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:39:59AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Then for the next cycle, we should plan on adding this
> fdt_increase_size() into the common fdt_status_disabled().
>
> Does it work?
Now that the situation is pretty much clear I am not overly concerned for
colibri-imx7s.
Do we
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:39:59AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Hi Francesco,
>
> On Mon, Jul 3, 2023 at 5:49 PM Francesco Dolcini wrote:
>
> > If I do this small partial revert
> >
> > --- a/arch/arm/dts/imx7d-colibri-eval-v3-u-boot.dtsi
> > +++
Hi Francesco,
On Mon, Jul 3, 2023 at 5:49 PM Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> If I do this small partial revert
>
> --- a/arch/arm/dts/imx7d-colibri-eval-v3-u-boot.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/imx7d-colibri-eval-v3-u-boot.dtsi
> @@ -15,7 +15,8 @@
> pinctrl-0 = <_lcdif_dat
>
On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 04:01:15PM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:54:40PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:40:51PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > On 7/3/23 18:49, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > > > Short update on this regression.
> > > >
> > > >
On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:54:40PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:40:51PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On 7/3/23 18:49, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > > Short update on this regression.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 04:19:22PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> >
On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:54:40PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:40:51PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On 7/3/23 18:49, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > > Short update on this regression.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 04:19:22PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> >
On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:40:51PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 7/3/23 18:49, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > Short update on this regression.
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 04:19:22PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > > I also noticed something weird on a colibri imx7s, this is not using SPL,
On 7/3/23 18:49, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
Short update on this regression.
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 04:19:22PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
I also noticed something weird on a colibri imx7s, this is not using SPL,
likely something completly different, however given this is new also from rc5
Short update on this regression.
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 04:19:22PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> I also noticed something weird on a colibri imx7s, this is not using SPL,
> likely something completly different, however given this is new also from rc5
> I
> thought it's valuable to report:
>
On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 11:05 AM Tom Rini wrote:
> I think this breaks x86, without updating their linker scripts at least.
What about this instead?
--- a/common/spl/spl_legacy.c
+++ b/common/spl/spl_legacy.c
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
static void spl_parse_legacy_validate(uintptr_t start, uintptr_t
On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 10:51:43AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 10:22 AM Fabio Estevam wrote:
>
> > Should we fix spl_end like this?
>
> Looking at u-boot-spl.map:
>
> 0x009122640x0 common/spl/spl.o
> 0x00912264
On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 10:22 AM Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Should we fix spl_end like this?
Looking at u-boot-spl.map:
0x009122640x0 common/spl/spl.o
0x00912264. = ALIGN (0x4)
0x00912264
Hi Francesco and Marek,
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 11:19 AM Francesco Dolcini wrote:
>
> Hello Marek,
> as briefly discussed off-list it looks like
> commit 77aed22b48ab ("spl: spl_legacy: Add extra address checks") introduces a
> regression on some board/arch, at least colibri and apalis imx6
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 06:58:26PM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 04:19:22PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > I also noticed something weird on a colibri imx7s, this is not using SPL,
> > likely something completly different, however given this is new also from
> > rc5 I
> >
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 04:19:22PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> Hello Marek,
> as briefly discussed off-list it looks like
> commit 77aed22b48ab ("spl: spl_legacy: Add extra address checks") introduces a
> regression on some board/arch, at least colibri and apalis imx6 fails to boot
> now
>
Hello Marek,
as briefly discussed off-list it looks like
commit 77aed22b48ab ("spl: spl_legacy: Add extra address checks") introduces a
regression on some board/arch, at least colibri and apalis imx6 fails to boot
now
```
Trying to boot from MMC1
SPL: Image overlaps SPL
resetting ...
```
>From
25 matches
Mail list logo
