Jagan, I resolved this by introducing a new Kconfig that affects what functionality is included in spl_fit.c; however, this leaves an uneasy feeling, as we now start to have different logic in our SPL stage.
Is there a plan in place to move sun50i to a TPL->SPL->U-Boot model? Thanks, Philipp. > On 24 Nov 2017, at 21:42, Dr. Philipp Tomsich > <philipp.toms...@theobroma-systems.com> wrote: > >> >> On 24 Nov 2017, at 21:36, Jagan Teki <ja...@amarulasolutions.com> wrote: >> >> On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Dr. Philipp Tomsich >> <philipp.toms...@theobroma-systems.com> wrote: >>> Jagan, Maxime & Tom, >>> >>> I have a couple of changes to spl_fit.c queued that we need to get merged >>> to fix some issues for ATF support on Rockchip platforms. >> >> Does all rk64 has enough SPL size's to fit? > > The 64bit Rockchip platforms either have more than enough SRAM (i.e. the > RK3399) or are already using a TPL w/ SPL executing in DRAM. > So the only failures I get are sun50i and sun50i_h3 platforms. > >> >>> However, due to internal alignment before the ARMv8 vectors, this breaks >>> the sun50i builds (all exceeding their SPL size by up to approx. 1KB), even >>> though I am adding only about a 100 bytes to the size of spl_fit.c. >> >> Yes, as per as my trails[1] it's not possible to increase SPL size. > > That is why I was suggesting to remove exceptions for sun50i for the time > being, as the alignment for the vectors is more than 1kB in binary size. > >>> The change that triggers this is: >>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/813598/ >>> >>> However, the root cause lies in the “.align 11” in exceptions.c, which >>> generates a ‘*fill*’ similar to this one (and we have been lucky enough >>> that this came out as a rather small number up until me increasing the size >>> of spl_fit.o): >>> *fill* 0x0000000000011214 0x5ec >>> .text.vectors 0x0000000000011800 0x838 >>> arch/arm/cpu/armv8/built-in.o >>> >>> The quickest way to resolve would be to drop support for exception vectors >>> on sun50i. >> >> Don't we miss the exceptions during SPL? >> >>> Any other suggestions are also welcome. >> >> I would rather think to implement TPL provided if there is no option >> to increase the SPL size instead of missing exception vectors. > > Someone will have to do this eventually, as the sun50i platforms are becoming > an issue for other platforms now. > >> >> [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/835973/ >> >> thanks! >> -- >> Jagan Teki >> Senior Linux Kernel Engineer | Amarula Solutions >> U-Boot, Linux | Upstream Maintainer >> Hyderabad, India. > > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot@lists.denx.de > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
