[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 0/8] omap-common: Common boot code OMAP3 support and SYS_BOOT-based fallback boot device

[Pali Rohár]

On Wednesday 10 June 2015 11:54:00 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Le mardi 09 juin 2015 à 20:34 +0200, Pali Rohár a écrit :
> > On Tuesday 09 June 2015 18:28:29 Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > > > I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go
> > > > at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like
> > > > the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.
> > > 
> > > So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f
> > > (see other email thread). Until somebody fix that broken commit, I
> > > cannot test your new patches in qemu or on (real) Nokia N900.
> > 
> > Now I tested this patch series on top of u-boot master with applied my 
> > patch "Nokia RX-51: Fix calculating return address in save_boot_params".
> >
> > And it really as I thought broke booting U-Boot on Nokia N900 in qemu.
> 
> I'm confused here -- did you try booting on the actual device or in
> qemu?
> 

I tested your changes only in qemu. But because you removed (or better
masked) required lowlevel asm code, it will not work on real n900 too.

> > So this patch series is NAK from my side.
> 
> Thanks for testing. Of course, the point is to make another version of
> the patch set that fits the N900 too, since we really need to integrate
> the omap3 to the common omap boot mechanism anyways.
> 

Make sure that asm function in rx51 lowlevel asm file is called
immediately from start.S. It is required. Basically no modification to
that function should be needed (maybe just fixing return address in lr).

> I may be able to get my hands on a N900 in a short while.

Do you have n900 device? Or are you going to use qemu?

Really, for development u-boot for n900 is easier to use qemu as you can
easier debug code...

> If you're interested, you're welcome to look at the issue and suggest
> what changes should be made to make the set compatible with the N900!
> 

Do not hide/mask/remove that required asm function. That should be all.

-- 
Pali Rohár
pali.rohar at gmail.com