Hi Vagrant, On Mon, 20 Feb 2023 at 09:21, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > > Hi Vagrant, > > On Sat, 18 Feb 2023 at 19:19, Vagrant Cascadian <vagr...@debian.org> wrote: > > > > On 2022-12-07, Simon Glass wrote: > > > Drop the use of scripts and rely on standard boot for all operation. > > > > This patch, applied as 3891c68ef50eda38d78c95ecd03aed030aa6bb53 broke > > booting on pinebook-pro-rk3399, which still tries to "run > > distro_bootcmd" but distro_bootcmd is no longer defined... probably > > several other rk3399 systems are similarly affected? Maybe other > > rockchip systems as well? Reverting the patch fixes booting on the > > pinebook-pro-rk3399, at least. > > > > It seems that rockpro64-rk3399 was used as an example, so that > > presumably works, but in actuality, this commit only modifies common > > files for many rockchip and rk3399 boards and nothing rockpro64-rk3399 > > specific, so the commit message is a bit misleading. > > > > I am not sure what the best way forward is; to quickly convert all the > > other boards in a new patch series, or incrementally shift one system at > > a time over (and somehow restore previous behavior in the > > meantime?)... as it stands it appears we are left with rk3399 boards > > partially converted but broken... > > > > FWIW, I have not confirmed for sure that other boards are broken, so it > > might just be pinebook-pro-rk3399 for some reason. I have a few rk3399 > > based boards I can test to confirm... > > I suspect it needs BOOTSTD_DEFAULTS enabled. Could you try that? I can > send a patch if you like? > > See also this series, in case we should apply patch 1 to -master > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/list/?series=342718
It turns out to be boostage, as the IRAM seems to get protected. I'll send a little series for all of this. Regards, Simon
