On Fri, Dec 06, 2019 at 02:37:52PM +0100, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: > On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 2:34 PM Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 06, 2019 at 01:58:46PM +0100, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 1:46 PM Patrice CHOTARD <patrice.chot...@st.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > > > This patch is breaking the STM32MP15 basic boot (spl => u-boot). > > > > > > Looking at socfpga gen5 u-boot.img, this is probably broken as well. > > > > > > And I don't even see any RB or TB tags here :-( > > > > Ugh, what the heck? I applied this because I looked over the changes > > and they seemed correct. I'm quite willing to just revert this but I > > would like to know how it's breaking. Sorry all! > > Looking at the branch a few lines up I can understand why this seemed > like a small change. I hadn't seen this before Patrice's mail, either. > > Let me test this on socfpga_socrates tomorrow, I could still be wrong since > this is from reading the code and binary only. But entry_point should be 0 > in my u-boot.img if I'm not mistaken, and that should break it.
Maybe I just haven't had enough coffee or time to think, but that sounds like entry_point being set wrong somewhere. Of course, if it's being set wrong somewhere and it's not self-contained within U-Boot to correct it (iow external scripts/docs), we have to deal with that reality. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
