[U-Boot] [PATCH 4/4] ARM: at91: lds: add test SPL binary size and bbs size

[Eugen.Hristev at microchip.com]

On 19.11.2018 16:31, Ben Whitten wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: U-Boot [mailto:u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de] On
>> Behalf Of Eugen.Hristev at microchip.com
>> Sent: 19 November 2018 08:23
>> To: u-boot at lists.denx.de
>> Cc: Nicolas.Ferre at microchip.com;
>> wenyou.yang at atmel.com
>> Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 4/4] ARM: at91: lds: add test SPL
>> binary size and bbs size
>>
>> From: Wenyou Yang <wenyou.yang at atmel.com>
>>
>> Add the test for the SPL binary size and the bbs section size.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wenyou Yang <wenyou.yang at atmel.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/arm/mach-at91/arm926ejs/u-boot-spl.lds | 10
>> ++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/arm926ejs/u-boot-spl.lds
>> b/arch/arm/mach-at91/arm926ejs/u-boot-spl.lds
>> index eca78f8..82098dc 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/arm926ejs/u-boot-spl.lds
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/arm926ejs/u-boot-spl.lds
>> @@ -48,3 +48,13 @@ SECTIONS
>>   		__bss_end = .;
>>   	} >.sdram
>>   }
>> +
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_SPL_MAX_SIZE)
>> +ASSERT(__image_copy_end - __image_copy_start <
> 
> There is no __image_copy_start causing SPL size calculation
> to error, replacing with __start resolves it.

Thank you, I will modify the patch and test. This means that we can let 
the SPL in configuration, which is great news.


Eugen

> 
>> (CONFIG_SPL_MAX_SIZE), \
>> +	"SPL image too big");
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_SPL_BSS_MAX_SIZE)
>> +ASSERT(__bss_end - __bss_start <
>> (CONFIG_SPL_BSS_MAX_SIZE), \
>> +	"SPL image BSS too big");
>> +#endif
>> --
>> 2.7.4
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> _
>> U-Boot mailing list
>> U-Boot at lists.denx.de
>> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot