On 2016-08-03 12:08, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Fabio, > > On 3 August 2016 at 12:44, Fabio Estevam <feste...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Simon, >> >> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: >> >>> Actually I think these are bugs and should be fixed. In this case, >>> from what I can tell netboot_common() should cache-align the size in >>> the call to: >>> >>> /* flush cache */ >>> flush_cache(load_addr, size); >> >> Do you mean like this? >> >> --- a/cmd/net.c >> +++ b/cmd/net.c >> @@ -244,6 +244,8 @@ static int netboot_common(enum proto_t proto, cmd_tbl_t >> *cmd >> } >> >> /* flush cache */ >> + load_addr &= ~(CONFIG_SYS_CACHELINE_SIZE - 1); >> + size = ALIGN(size, CONFIG_SYS_CACHELINE_SIZE); >> flush_cache(load_addr, size); >> >> bootstage_mark(BOOTSTAGE_ID_NET_LOADED); >> >> This makes the net warnings go away. >> >> There is still this one that I am seeing: >> >> Kernel image @ 0x80800000 [ 0x000000 - 0x6fea70 ] >> ## Flattened Device Tree blob at 83000000 >> Booting using the fdt blob at 0x83000000 >> Using Device Tree in place at 83000000, end 83009c5d >> >> Starting kernel ... >> >> CACHE: Misaligned operation at range [00900000, 00900529] >> [ 0.000000] Booting Linux on physical CPU 0x0 >> >> Any ideas where it may come from? > > Not really...maybe boot_ramdisk_high()? > > It's clearly pretty late in the process.
That looks like a SRAM address, and it is used for the secure stuff for instance (CONFIG_ARMV7_SECURE_BASE). I bet its from relocate_secure_section in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/virt-v7.c. Will send out a patch for that. -- Stefan _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot