[PATCH] Revert "spl: Drop bd_info in the data section"

[Tim Harvey]

On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 11:44 AM Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Tom,
>
> On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 at 06:38, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 06:26:08AM +1200, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > Hi Tom,
> > >
> > > On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 at 06:18, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 05:49:19AM +1200, Simon Glass wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > > > As to a weak function, what would the default behaviour be? If we can
> > > > > define that, then it would be better IMO.
> > > > >
> > > > > When we try to refactor things, weak functions and undefined (or
> > > > > arch-specific behaviour) can really make things tough.
> > > >
> > > > Well, what was the problem you were trying to solve here?  I assumed
> > > > there was a case where things actively broke, with the previous design,
> > > > and it's not just the 64byte savings in some cases.  But is it?
> > >
> > > Yes the region of memory is not writable, so must be allocated at runtime.
> >
> > Where, on x86?  Some ARM cases?  That's one of the other things to sort
> > out here.
>
> Yes, on coral and likely newer things to come...For ARM I don't know
> of any such problems.
>

I'm not sure I understand if there is agreement on a solution to this
patch breaking several or many boards? I count 58 IMX6 boards using
SPL and none of them currently define CONFIG_SPL_ALLOC_BD=y. It sounds
like Adam said OMAP boards were broken as well and I'm not clear if
those boards are fixed yet either.

Best regards,

Tim