On 09/17/2018 10:44 PM, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: > > OK, so I got more than 2 weeks off of U-Boot, but here I'm back... ;-) > > On 18.08.2018 14:25, Marek Vasut wrote: >> On 08/18/2018 10:55 AM, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: >>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 12:20 PM Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >>>> On 08/17/2018 08:56 AM, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 1:57 AM Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >>>>>> On 08/16/2018 09:44 PM, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 4:04 PM Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >>>>>>>> On 08/16/2018 03:50 PM, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 3:15 PM Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 08/16/2018 03:12 PM, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de <mailto:ma...@denx.de>> schrieb am >>>>>>>>>>> Do., 16. >>>>>>>>>>> Aug. 2018, 15:06: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 08/16/2018 03:00 PM, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 1:18 PM Marek Vasut >>>>>>>>>>> <ma...@denx.de >>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:ma...@denx.de>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> On 08/16/2018 09:38 AM, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>> gd->env_addr points to pre-relocation address even >>>>>>>>>>> after >>>>>>>>>>> >>> relocation. This leads to an abort in env_callback_init >>>>>>>>>>> >>> when loading the environment. >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> Fix this by enabling CONFIG_SYS_EXTRA_ENV_RELOC. >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> Signed-off-by: Simon Goldschmidt >>>>>>>>>>> <simon.k.r.goldschm...@gmail.com >>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:simon.k.r.goldschm...@gmail.com>> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> I have one last question -- does this somehow >>>>>>>>>>> influence SPL ? >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > No, it doesn't. The code that gets enabled by this >>>>>>>>>>> define is in >>>>>>>>>>> > common/board_r.c, which is not linked for SPL. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Ah, thanks for checking. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> btw do you think it'd make sense to just enable this by >>>>>>>>>>> default on all >>>>>>>>>>> systems and zap the EXTRA_ENV_RELOC macro altogether ? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, that's what I have thought about already. Just like the >>>>>>>>>>> for the >>>>>>>>>>> embedded device tree relocation, we could then probably use >>>>>>>>>>> gd->reloc_off instead of CONFIG_SYS_MONITOR_BASE. I'm just >>>>>>>>>>> not sure this >>>>>>>>>>> really works for all boards, but it would be worth a try to >>>>>>>>>>> push after >>>>>>>>>>> this release is out. >>>>>>>>>> I think so too. I cannot think of a reason why this shouldn't >>>>>>>>>> be enabled >>>>>>>>>> in fact. >>>>>>>>> Exactly. Too me it seems like a leftover, especially given the >>>>>>>>> use of >>>>>>>>> CONFIG_SYS_MONITOR_BASE, which seems a little outdated, too. >>>>>>>>> I've set up a reminder for a patch to remove it after the release. >>>>>>>> Feel free to send it now. >>>>>>> OK, I have tried, but it seems it's not that easy: some boards >>>>>>> override the initial gd->env_addr by setting CONFIG_ENV_ADDR. So if >>>>>>> this is outside of U-Boot's pre-relocation range, it clearly should >>>>>>> not be relocated. One might find an improved way to relocate >>>>>>> gd->env_addr if it is internal (e.g. checking the range to be in >>>>>>> pre-relocation?). But simply removing the EXTRA_ENV_RELOC does not >>>>>>> seem to work. >>>>>> Shouldn't most of those boards be easily fixable ? >>>>> Well, if we unconditionally alter gd->env_addr by gd->reloc_off, >>>>> boards that have their initial gd->env_addr outside of the initial >>>>> binary can be fixed only by changing their behaviour. I don't know how >>>>> widely used this feature is, but since it's a config option >>>>> (CONFIG_ENV_ADDR), how would we know? >>>> git grep ? But aren't you mixing CONFIG_ENV_ADDR and CONFIG_ENV_RELOC ? >>> Have a look at env_sf_init() in env/sf.c (called from env_init(), >>> which in turn is called from board_init_f()). There gd->env_addr is >>> initialized by a config setting. If this user-supplied address is >>> outside of the binary, relocating it is wrong, isn't it? >> I think you want to relocate the env close to where U-Boot is relocated >> in all cases, no ? > > Hmm, yes, *I do*, but reading env/sf.c it seems like there *are* ways to > have this initial environment located outside of the initial binary > hence making relocation invalidate it. Now I'm in no position to see if > this is an error or legal usage of the code as it was meant to be... > > So I think we have two options: > a) apply CONFIG_SYS_EXTRA_ENV_RELOC for socfpga or
But SoCFPGA can have env in SF too, so you cannot apply this too all SoCFPGA, unless I am wrong. > b) push a patch that always relocates the initial environment and see if > someone cares... Wouldn't it make sense to fix the sf and then enable env reloc for it too ? > Which of the two do you prefer? > > Simon -- Best regards, Marek Vasut _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
