[U-Boot-Custodians] SPL / TPL
sjg at chromium.org
Wed Oct 16 16:56:05 UTC 2019
On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 at 10:42, Wolfgang Denk <wd at denx.de> wrote:
> Dear Simon,
> In message <CAPnjgZ1vve1yDWXy2it=ShqGqGM6NjpkJVOP=O3ySPM08fObmA at mail.gmail.com> you wrote:
> > From my understanding it is more common that we can't load SPL
> > directly. E.g. Rockchip uses TPL because the boot ROM cannot load SPL,
> > as I understand it.
> But this is just because they designed it that way, right?
> I know that Heiko is frequently struggeling tokeep SPL size for some
> Atmel AT91 based boards below the 4kB limit, but he does not need
> any TPL, and if he did, could he not have a small SPL and a bigger
> TPL ?
> > Let's agree to disagree on this one. I think I've explained how I
> > understand it. To me it is it more consistent to down from U-Boot
> > backwacks than from the boot rom forwards. U-Boot is always last but
> > there are 0, 1, 2 or 3 things before it.
> I disagree. What about Falcon mode, when there is no U-Boot proper
> at all? Your counting starts in Nirwana then?
We still normally do build U-Boot, it's just that we skip it. I have
never used Falcon mode myself since the benefit is generally small.
For very slow devices or old storage it can help.
More information about the U-Boot-Custodians