On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 12:28:22AM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote: > On 10/11/23 23:41, Simon Glass wrote: > > On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 at 18:56, Sean Anderson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > The entry point is not always the same as the load address. Use the value > > > of the entrypoint property if it exists and is nonzero (following the > > > example of spl_load_simple_fit). > > > > > > Fixes: 8a9dc16e4d0 ("spl: Add full fitImage support") > > > Signed-off-by: Sean Anderson <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > > > > common/spl/spl_fit.c | 4 +++- > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <[email protected]> > > > > The check for 0 makes me uneasy, but I can't imagine it being valid in > > practice. > > This is mostly to match spl_load_simple_fit: > > /* > * If a platform does not provide CONFIG_SYS_UBOOT_START, U-Boot's > * Makefile will set it to 0 and it will end up as the entry point > * here. What it actually means is: use the load address. > */ > > SYS_UBOOT_START doesn't seem to be set very often and defaults to TEXT_BASE. > That > appears to be undefined on > > efi-x86_app64 efi-x86_app32 xtfpga 3c120 10m50 > > but none of these platforms define SPL_LOAD_FIT. So maybe this is moot?
Moot for the last 3 there yes. Not sure about the U-Boot as EFI app builds. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
