On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 08:40:52PM +0200, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: > Am 22.04.2019 um 16:36 schrieb Tom Rini: > >On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 10:12:36PM +0200, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: > >>Heinrich, > >> > >>On 02.04.19 19:19, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > >>>The SPL image for the Tinker Board has to fit into 32 KiB. This includes > >>>up to 2 KiB for the file header. > >>> > >>>A new configuration variable CONFIG_SPL_SIZE_LIMIT is introduced to define > >>>the board specific limit. > >>> > >>>A common Makefile function is used for this test and the test against > >>>CONFIG_BOARD_SIZE_LIMIT. > >>> > >>>Move the board size check from arch/arm/mach-imx/Makefile to Makefile. > >> > >>Has anything from this series been applied? I now have a working patch that > >>applies on top of this and adds a full SPL SRAM size check (including HEAP, > >>GD and stack; via a host tool) which works for socfpga (as an example of a > >>platform where SPL binary is loaded to limited SRAM). > >> > >>Actually, my patch would replace your patch 3/4 but build on 1/4 (2/4 and > >>4/4 are arch-specific). > >> > >>How should we proceed here? I could send a series including your 1/4, or I > >>could send a series completely building on this series, at the downside of > >>more or less reverting your 2/4. > > > >What I would like to see is i.MX (and rockchip) converted to use your > >new test as well (also, yay! Thanks for following up on that!) and we > >drop the existing check here. > > Ok, so while I cannot really help on i.MX and rockchip, why don't you accept > this series from Heinrich and I'll send my patch as followup? Then we can > discuss this with i.MX and rockchip maintainers.
Can you post your series now, and we can move from there? Thanks! -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
