[PATCH 3/3] imx8qm_mek: Increase CONFIG_SYS_BOOTM_LEN to 64MB

[Marcel Ziswiler]

On Mon, 2021-08-30 at 13:46 -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 03:05:32PM +0000, Marcel Ziswiler wrote:
> > On Mon, 2021-08-30 at 14:18 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > On 8/30/21 1:11 PM, Oleksandr Suvorov wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 10:55 PM Marek Vasut <marex at denx.de> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > On 8/29/21 9:39 PM, Oleksandr Suvorov wrote:
> > > > > > The BSP platform LmP supports the board NXP iMX8QM MEK. The
> > > > > > kernel size in LmP exceeds 32Mb. Increase the maximum size
> > > > > > of an uncompressed kernel to fix the following error:
> > > > > >       Uncompressing Kernel Image
> > > > > >       Error: inflate() returned -5
> > > > > >       Image too large: increase CONFIG_SYS_BOOTM_LEN
> > > > > >       Must RESET board to recover
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Maybe we should increase the default for arm64 instead ? 8 MiB is too small.
> > > > 
> > > > I completely agree if NXP doesn't have objections.
> > > > @Peng Fan Do you mind?
> > > 
> > > Increase it for all of arm64 , or all of U-Boot even. This has nothing 
> > > to do with NXP.
> > 
> > In general, I agree. However, in practice this can have devastating effects on stuff as discussed here:
> > 
> > https://marc.info/?l=u-boot&m=162999598824381
> 
> In that yes, if we allow for larger kernels to be loaded, we also need
> to ensure platforms use sane relocation values, it also needs to be
> considered.

Exactly.

> But even if we have CONFIG_SYS_BOOTM_LEN set large, unless
> we then also disable device tree / initrd relocation, we don't have a
> silent problem?

Well, I am not saying we should NOT increase CONFIG_SYS_BOOTM_LEN. I am just cautioning that this may cause
further issue resp. might require further adjustments down the road.