On 9.6.2016 16:40, Alexander Graf wrote: > On 06/09/2016 04:32 PM, Michal Simek wrote: >> On 9.6.2016 16:29, Alexander Graf wrote: >>> On 06/09/2016 04:23 PM, Michal Simek wrote: >>>> Disable arch_fixup_fdt() calls for cases where U-Boot shouldn't update >>>> memory setup in DTB file. >>>> One example of usage of this option is to boot OS with different memory >>>> setup than U-Boot use. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <[email protected]> >>> Could we instead just have the board file provide a fixup? It could then >>> also fix up the efi memory map. >> Not sure what exactly you are asking for. >> Do you mean to add fixup function to board file and overwrite default >> one? > > You have to touch some other code anyway to make this work with a > particular board, right? In that case, you can as well add a function to > the board file that explicitly provides a different, known good memory map.
I cant' see the reason to touch particular board. In past AMP solution where one core use the part of memory and second another part was the reason I needed this. For ARM64 case as you know from arm IRC I was trying to boot Linux from memory above 32bit space and for these tests I need to convince u-boot not to touch dtb memory setup. But for the same board I want to use standard behavior but for some case this needs to be enabled. > > Can you have a weaker overload? Basically I would like to have a board > provide arch_fixup_fdt() which would override the one in bootm-fdt.c. > But we can also rename arch_fixup_fdt() in bootm-fdt.c to > board_fixup_fdt() function, declare it weak and have arch_fixup_fdt() > call that. arch_fixup_fdt is already weaker function in image-fdt.c and ARM and MIPS define it. I don't think that renaming solve anything. This patch is really just ON/OFF switch of fixup behavior. Thanks, Michal _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
