[U-Boot] [PATCH] Revert "fdt: Fix fdtdec_get_addr_size() for 64-bit"

[Tom Warren]

Simon, et al,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: sjg at google.com [mailto:sjg at google.com] On Behalf Of Simon Glass
> Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 3:05 AM
> To: Bin Meng
> Cc: Michal Suchanek; Tom Rini; Stephen Warren; U-Boot Mailing List; Tom
> Warren; Thierry Reding
> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Revert "fdt: Fix fdtdec_get_addr_size() for 64-
> bit"
> 
> Hi,
> 


[snip]

> 
> I plan to apply this revert to u-boot-x86 (where SPI is currently
> broken) and (once it has a bit more testing) also this patch which I think makes
> the change in a safer way:
> 
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/504918/
> 
> At present that patch breaks at least one x86 board and I have not dug into it
> yet.
> 
> The revert should not break tegra, according to Stephen.

Unfortunately, my testing on P2571 with TOT u-boot-tegra (rebased against TOT u-boot/master this morning) shows that that is not true.

The revert of the disputed 'fdtdec_get_addr_size' patch _does_ break Tegra 64-bit (P2571, at least). Nyan-big is OK.  With Simon's revert in place, my board just loops on SPL signon, so I assume it's faulting, etc. in CPU init.  Note that this is the current state of TOT u-boot/master.

If I 'revert' Simon's revert, I can boot my P2571 to the command prompt again.  If I leave his revert of fdtdec_get_addr_size in, but use Stephen's rewrite patch (as listed by Simon above), I can again boot to the command prompt on my P2571 (haven't tested my Nyan-big yet).

I've got some patches pending in u-boot-tegra/master that I wanted to send a PR for, but I can't until I can assure that at least a small sample of boards (T124 and T210, in this case) still boot.

Since Stephen's patch isn't a Tegra patch, I don't think I should apply it to u-boot-tegra for the PR.  I think it's best handled by TomR in u-boot/master, especially considering the controversy surrounding the previous attempt, and Simon's assertion that it still needs work for at least on x86 board.

Please put your heads together and solve this, since we're now broken on 64-bit T210 Tegra  (Stephen - I know you are OOTO and may not be able to test this on your T210 boards, but I'd like someone else to verify my findings ASAP if possible).

Tom
--
nvpublic
> 
> Regards,
> Simon