[PATCH u-boot-marvell 00/13] Yet another kwboot improvements

[Stefan Roese]

Hi Pali,

On 25.10.21 16:42, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Monday 25 October 2021 16:39:44 Stefan Roese wrote:
>> Hi Marek,
>>
>> On 25.10.21 15:12, Marek Behún wrote:
>>> From: Marek Behún <marek.behun at nic.cz>
>>>
>>> Hello Stefan,
>>>
>>> these are another improvements for kwboot, please apply only after series
>>>     arm: mvebu: nandpagesize support for kwbimage v1
>>
>> I'm checking right now and have applied the 3 NAND patches on current
>> master. But this patchset fails at this one:
>>
>> tools: kwboot: Do not modify kwbimage header before increasing its size
>>
>> [stefan at ryzen u-boot-marvell (kwboot-test1)]$ git am -3 ~/tmp/kwboot2/*
>> Applying: tools: kwboot: Initialize rfds to zero
>> Applying: tools: kwboot: Fix initialization of tty device
>> Applying: tools: kwboot: Reserve enough space for patching kwbimage in
>> memory
>> Applying: tools: kwboot: Validate 4-byte image data checksum
>> Applying: tools: kwboot: Inject baudrate change back code after data part
>> Applying: tools: kwboot: Recalculate 4-byte data checksum after injecting
>> baudrate code
>> Applying: tools: kwboot: Correctly set configuration of UART for BootROM
>> messages
>> Applying: tools: kwboot: Show verbose message when waiting for baudrate
>> change magic
>> Applying: tools: kwboot: Simplify code for aligning image header
>> Applying: tools: kwboot: Do not modify kwbimage header before increasing its
>> size
>> error: sha1 information is lacking or useless (tools/kwboot.c).
>> error: could not build fake ancestor
>> Patch failed at 0010 tools: kwboot: Do not modify kwbimage header before
>> increasing its size
>> hint: Use 'git am --show-current-patch=diff' to see the failed patch
>> When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
>> If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
>> To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".
>>
>> Any idea what's missing here?
> 
> Hello! I'm using also this patch:
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20211021144609.9319-2-pali@kernel.org/

Ah, yes. That does the trick. Now all patches apply clean. Thanks.

Testing with all these patches on my AXP target does show, it still
does not work with baudrate > 115k:

[stefan at ryzen u-boot-marvell (kwboot-test1)]$ ./tools/kwboot -B 230400 
-b u-boot-spl.kwb -t 
/dev/serial/by-id/usb-FTDI_FT232R_USB_UART_A1019EGY-if00-port0
Patching image boot signature to UART
Injecting binary header code for changing baudrate to 230400 Bd
Injecting code for changing baudrate back
Sending boot message. Please reboot the target...|
Waiting 2s and flushing tty
Sending boot image header (90112 bytes)...
   0 % 
[......................................................................]
  10 % 
[......................................................................]
  20 % 
[......................................................................]
  29 % 
[......................................................................]
  39 % 
[......................................................................]
  49 % 
[......................................................................]
  59 % 
[......................................................................]
  69 % 
[......................................................................]
  79 % 
[......................................................................]
  89 % 
[......................................................................]
  99 % [.... 
       ]
Done

U-Boot SPL 2021.10-00908-gc129aa2f173a (Oct 25 2021 - 17:10:55 +0200)
High speed PHY - Version: 2.1.5 (COM-PHY-V20)
High speed PHY - Ended Successfully
DDR3 Training Sequence - Ver 5.7.4
DDR3 Training Sequence - Ended Successfully
Trying to boot from BOOTROM
Returning to BootROM (return address 0xffff0aa0)...

Changing baudrate to 230400 Bd
Baudrate was not changed


xmodem: Protocol error
[stefan at ryzen u-boot-marvell (kwboot-test1)]$


Not changing the baudrate still works. Any idea what I should test? Or
do you have further changes in the queue that I should wait upon?

Thanks,
Stefan