Hi Stefano, On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 1:29 PM Stefano Babic <sba...@denx.de> wrote: > > Hi Jagan, Breno, > > On 17/09/19 09:13, Jagan Teki wrote: > > Hi Breno, > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 6:06 PM Breno Matheus Lima <breno.l...@nxp.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> In case CONFIG_SECURE_BOOT is enabled we need to limit the SPL size to > >> avoid a possible HAB failure event: > >> > >> --------- HAB Event 1 ----------------- > >> event data: > >> 0xdb 0x00 0x14 0x42 0x33 0x22 0x33 0x00 > >> 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x0f 0x00 0x90 0x70 0x00 > >> 0x00 0x01 0x10 0x00 > >> STS = HAB_FAILURE (0x33) > >> RSN = HAB_INV_ADDRESS (0x22) > >> CTX = HAB_CTX_TARGET (0x33) > >> ENG = HAB_ENG_ANY (0x00) > >> > >> As explained in Commit 23612534fe0f ("spl: imx6: Provide a SPL_SIZE_LIMIT > >> default") the i.MX6 SPL size limit is 68KB. > >> > >> The ROM code is copying the image size defined in boot data to its > >> respective load address, in case we exceed the OCRAM free region a > >> HAB invalid address failure event is generated. > >> > >> The maximum CSF size is defined in CONFIG_CSF_SIZE, reduce SPL size > >> limit based on this configuration. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Breno Lima <breno.l...@nxp.com> > >> --- > >> tools/spl_size_limit.c | 3 +++ > >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/tools/spl_size_limit.c b/tools/spl_size_limit.c > >> index 98ff491867..8902e30129 100644 > >> --- a/tools/spl_size_limit.c > >> +++ b/tools/spl_size_limit.c > >> @@ -14,6 +14,9 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) > >> > >> #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SIZE_LIMIT > >> spl_size_limit = CONFIG_SPL_SIZE_LIMIT; > >> +#if defined(CONFIG_SECURE_BOOT) && defined(CONFIG_CSF_SIZE) > >> + spl_size_limit -= CONFIG_CSF_SIZE; > >> +#endif > > > > But, if the target enable HAB on SPL the size would be part of SPL > > limit, isn't ? > > Indeed - it is not clear to me, too, if it is correct, even if CSF is > added later by the NXP signing tools. The patch reduces significantly > the available space for SPL, I just wondering why just mamoj is > affected. Jagan, does it work without this patch applied ?
mamoj is affected since the board enables SPL_DM, SPL_OF_CONTROL. Yes, the build look fine without this patch. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot