[U-Boot] [PATCH v9 18/30] nand: mxc: Switch NAND SPL to generic SPL

[Benoît Thébaudeau]

Hi Albert,

On Monday, April 1, 2013 10:26:21 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi Benoît,
> 
> On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 02:30:00 +0200 (CEST), Benoît Thébaudeau
> <benoit.thebaudeau at advansee.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Albert,
> > 
> > On Sunday, March 31, 2013 7:30:24 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> > > Hi Benoît,
> > > 
> > > I have managed to rebase your patch series and have tested it over the
> > > ARM targets. This particular patch was the only one to cause an issue,
> > > and an amusing one at that:
> > > 
> > > On Wed,  6 Mar 2013 19:59:24 +0100, Benoît Thébaudeau
> > > <benoit.thebaudeau at advansee.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > This also fixes support for mx31pdk and tx25, which had been broken by
> > > > commit
> > > > e05e5de7fae5bec79617e113916dac6631251156.
> > > 
> > > Both boards actually build fine with e05e5de7fae (and have built
> > > fine since, at least in all of the routine ARM-wide builds I do as the
> > > ARM custodian and where I accept zero build failures or warnings).
> > 
> > Yes, for me too. This was not a build issue, but a runtime one.
> > 
> > > And both boards actually do not build at all with this patch :) and die
> > > with the same error:
> > > 
> > > .../spl/u-boot-spl.lds:45: non constant or forward reference address
> > > expression for section .bss
> > > 
> > > In both case I have double-checked this using Ubuntu's gcc version
> > > 4.7.2 (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.7.2-1ubuntu1) or ELDK 5.3's gcc version 4.7.2
> > > (GCC).
> > 
> > OK. That worked fine for me and Fabio at the time I issued the v9, so it
> > can be
> > the rebase, or something that changed in mainline in the meantime, or the
> > toolchain. According to your tests, it's very unlikely that the toolchain
> > is
> > involved.
> > 
> > I've looked at the Git history, and the guilty commit is 3ebd1cb. But
> > thanks to
> > commit 65cdd64, this build issue should be easily solved by replacing:
> > +#define CONFIG_SPL_LDSCRIPT        "arch/$(ARCH)/cpu/u-boot.lds"
> > with:
> > +#define CONFIG_SPL_LDSCRIPT        "arch/$(ARCH)/cpu/u-boot-spl.lds"
> > in both mx31pdk.h and tx25.h.
> > 
> > Can you please retest with this change?
> 
> Patch 18/30 amended with this change and testing done; all ARM boards
> build fine now.

Thanks for testing that.

> > This line could even be dropped from tx25.h since there is no arm926ejs SPL
> > linker script obstructing the default assignment, contrary to arm1136 for
> > mx31pdk, but that would be risky if such a linker script is added later.
> > 
> > Is it still OK for the release if I send v10 on April 8 as I said (so just
> > with
> > the rebase including the change above if you confirm that everything is OK
> > like
> > that)?
> 
> You have Scott's acked-by for the NAND parts, and Tom's reviewed-by is
> proof enough for me that he is ok with the few non-ARM-only patches,
> so the patch series in itself is fine (assuming v10 is identical to
> v9 as I rebased it).
> 
> I would just like some reports that boards (mx31pdk and tx25 especially,
> but others too, including a few non-ARM to make sure) have no issue
> running v10.

OK, then it's probably better if I send v10 ASAP. I may not have access to my
repo before this date, and I have not kept my v9 bundle in my outbox, so can you
just send me back this bundle please? I will try to send a v10 during this week.

Best regards,
Benoît