Hello Michal, On Wed, 4 Feb 2015 10:56:02 +0100, Michal Simek <michal.si...@xilinx.com> wrote: > On 02/04/2015 04:11 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > Hi Michal, > > > > > > On Tue, 3 Feb 2015 10:11:39 +0100 > > Michal Simek <michal.si...@xilinx.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi Simon, > >> > >> On 02/03/2015 03:02 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > >>> Hi. > >>> > >>> > >>> On Mon, 2 Feb 2015 16:57:15 -0700 > >>> Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi Michal, > >>>> > >>>> On 2 February 2015 at 08:31, Michal Simek <michal.si...@xilinx.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> Targets with CONFIG_NEEDS_MANUAL_RELOC do not use REL/RELA > >>>>> relocation (mostly only GOT) where functions aray are not > >>>>> updated. This patch is fixing function pointers for DM core > >>>>> and serial-uclass to ensure that relocated functions are called. > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.si...@xilinx.com> > >>>>> --- > >>>>> > >>>>> drivers/core/root.c | 64 > >>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>>> drivers/serial/serial-uclass.c | 16 +++++++++++ > >>>>> 2 files changed, 80 insertions(+) > >>>> > >>>> How long will we have to carry this patch? It seems that if we add any > >>>> new driver we will have to add more code like this? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> This patch is unfortunate. > >>> Can we discontinue CONFIG_NEEDS_MANUAL_RELOC some day? > >> > >> This patch (or similar one) has to be alive when we have platform > >> which requires CONFIG_NEEDS_MANUAL_RELOC for full u-boot. > >> There is an option to move to REL/RELA but the question is if > >> all platforms have it/support it. Unfortunately I think that > >> it will be in the tree for a long time. > >> > >>> > >>> If we use SPL, we do not have to relocate code, I think. > >> > >> SPL doesn't have relocation that's why this code is not used there. > >> > > > > It is not what I meant. > > > > > > If SPL can directly load the main u-boot image > > to the DRAM address where it is linked, > > we do not relocate the code in the main image. > > Current behavior is that SPL is reading u-boot.img entry point which > can be in any location and jump to it and u-boot self relocate to the end of > memory. > If SPL adds u-boot directly to the location where it should run after > relocation > then relocation is not needed. > To ensure this capability (based on my poor GOT/REL/RELA) experience it means > that SPL loads u-boot to that location and patch REL/RELA section based on > this location > and internal relocation should be skipped.
IOW, that SPL perform the work of relocate_code() in U-Boot -- at least, on ARM, where REL/RELA is used. > This is definitely doable for REL/RELA case and it can also speedup boot > process Not sure about the speed-up, but never mind. > (I don't think there is easy way how to solve this with just GOT relocation > because > of that MANUAL_RELOC code which is patching arrays with function pointers). Even without importing SPL in the equation, switching from GOT to REL/RELA has enourmous advantages. > Thanks, > Michal Amicalement, -- Albert. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
