Le mercredi 10 juin 2015 à 12:42 +0200, Pali Rohár a écrit : > On Wednesday 10 June 2015 12:34:39 Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Wednesday 10 June 2015 11:54:00 Paul Kocialkowski wrote: > > > Le mardi 09 juin 2015 à 20:34 +0200, Pali Rohár a écrit : > > > > On Tuesday 09 June 2015 18:28:29 Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > > On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote: > > > > > > I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go > > > > > > at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like > > > > > > the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed. > > > > > > > > > > So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f > > > > > (see other email thread). Until somebody fix that broken commit, I > > > > > cannot test your new patches in qemu or on (real) Nokia N900. > > > > > > > > Now I tested this patch series on top of u-boot master with applied my > > > > patch "Nokia RX-51: Fix calculating return address in save_boot_params". > > > > > > > > And it really as I thought broke booting U-Boot on Nokia N900 in qemu. > > > > > > I'm confused here -- did you try booting on the actual device or in > > > qemu? > > > > > > > I tested your changes only in qemu. But because you removed (or better > > masked) required lowlevel asm code, it will not work on real n900 too. > > > > > > So this patch series is NAK from my side. > > > > > > Thanks for testing. Of course, the point is to make another version of > > > the patch set that fits the N900 too, since we really need to integrate > > > the omap3 to the common omap boot mechanism anyways. > > > > > > > Make sure that asm function in rx51 lowlevel asm file is called > > immediately from start.S. It is required. Basically no modification to > > that function should be needed (maybe just fixing return address in lr).
The problem is that this declaration conflicts with the one from omap-common's lowlevel_init.S. I understand that it is not needed for the RX-51 since it is not loaded by the U-Boot SPL or by the bootrom. Perhaps the best way to do things here would be to have a config option clearly stating that it should not expect the booting device information structure in r0. This situation is not specific to the RX-51 anyways. > > > I may be able to get my hands on a N900 in a short while. > > > > Do you have n900 device? Or are you going to use qemu? > > > > Really, for development u-boot for n900 is easier to use qemu as you can > > easier debug code... I didin't know it was possible, perhaps I'll try it. I have a friend who owns a N900, I could certainly borrow it for a while to ensure that this patch set goes smoothly on it. > > > If you're interested, you're welcome to look at the issue and suggest > > > what changes should be made to make the set compatible with the N900! > > > > > > > Do not hide/mask/remove that required asm function. That should be all. > And why is change to file board/nokia/rx51/lowlevel_init.S required? See my comment above. -- Paul Kocialkowski, Replicant developer Replicant is a fully free Android distribution running on several devices, a free software mobile operating system putting the emphasis on freedom and privacy/security. Website: http://www.replicant.us/ Blog: http://blog.replicant.us/ Wiki/tracker/forums: http://redmine.replicant.us/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
