On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 01:23:56AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 11/21/19 11:45 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 11:01:43PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> On 11/21/19 10:59 PM, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > >>> On 11/21/19 9:12 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > >>>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 09:09:29PM +0100, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > >>>>> Hello Soeren, > >>>>> > >>>>> when trying to add support for function key support in the USB keyboard > >>>>> driver u-boot.imx for the TBS2910 surpassed the maximum size for > >>>>> u-boot.imx. > >>>>> https://travis-ci.org/marex/u-boot-usb/builds/614059004 > >>>>> > >>>>> Do you remember why on the TBS2910 board this size is limited to > >>>>> 0x5fc00? Other i.MX6 boards like the Wandboard allow a much larger > >>>>> u-boot.imx. > >>>>> > >>>>> The limit is defined here: > >>>>> include/configs/tbs2910.h:80: > >>>>> #define CONFIG_BOARD_SIZE_LIMIT 392192 /* (CONFIG_ENV_OFFSET - 1024) */ > >>>>> > >>>>> Could the value CONFIG_ENV_OFFSET=0x60000 be enlarged? > >>>>> > >>>>> Many i.MX6 defconfigs use CONFIG_ENV_OFFSET=0xC0000. > >>>> > >>>> The nature of these boards (aimed at end users) means that we just do > >>>> not want to / cannot really move the stored environment. Thanks! > >>> > >>> Another possibility would be to reduce the image size by using > >>> CONFIG_REGEX=n which should be fine for a board with only one supported > >>> network interface. > >> > >> But the board was fine before your patchset got applied and this is just > >> a workaround for added bloat, which reduces functionality. I dislike > >> trading functionality for bloat, sorry. > > > > One persons "bloat" is another persons "added functionality". > > It would seem this board did not suffer from the lack of this particular > functionality before, and I would say that a board should stay at least > as functional as it was when it was added. Replacing existing > functionality with random unrelated new one makes no sense.
Was it tho? I believe we're talking about supporting some additional keys via USB keyboard. This board does in fact expect users to be at the U-Boot prompt via USB keyboard. > > I believe > > the specific changes in question that once again push this board over > > fall in to that grey area. Whatever size-trimming the board maintainer > > is fine with next is fine with me, but needs to get ack'd by someone. > > Or, the other option is, make these new extra features configurable and > disable them on this board. And so there should be no size problem. But that direction leads to saying every slight bit of functionality requires a new Kconfig entry. Some levels of bugfixes as well. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
