[PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04

[Quentin Schulz]

Hi Dorde,

On 2/3/26 4:41 PM, Dorde Stojicevic wrote:
> [You don't often get email from dorde.stojicevic at rohde-schwarz.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
> 
>  From ae3f90922f5c31bd6198deb149edb9476ecfe4ef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Dorde Stojicevic dorde.stojicevic at rohde-schwarz.com<mailto:dorde.stojicevic at rohde-schwarz.com>
> Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2026 14:48:36 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] arm: Backward compatibility to U-Boot v2020.04 Series-to: u-boot at lists.denx.de<mailto:u-boot at lists.denx.de> Series-version: 1
> Signed-off-by: Dorde Stojicevic dorde.stojicevic at rohde-schwarz.com<mailto:dorde.stojicevic at rohde-schwarz.com>
> 
> Cover-letter:
> Backward compatibility with U-Boot v2020.04
> Needed in order to boot LynxSecure Hypervisor, otherwise
> U-Boot will fail at this position and reset the controller
> END
> Commit-notes:
> Backward compatibility with U-Boot v2020.04
> Needed in order to boot LynxSecure Hypervisor, otherwise
> U-Boot will fail at this position and reset the controller
> END

Signed-off-by after the commit log.

Also, this isn't a good enough justification. Why is this actually 
required for booting this hypervisor? Because all this does is...

> ---
> boot/bootm.c | 27 ++++++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/boot/bootm.c b/boot/bootm.c
> index 4bdca22ea8c..c90c36a6988 100644
> --- a/boot/bootm.c
> +++ b/boot/bootm.c
> @@ -684,22 +684,19 @@ static int bootm_load_os(struct bootm_headers *images, int boot_progress)
>                  int ret;
> 
>                  ret = booti_setup(load, &relocated_addr, &image_size, false);
> -               if (ret) {
> -                       printf("Failed to prep arm64 kernel (err=%d)\n", ret);
> -                       return BOOTM_ERR_RESET;

... remove the check on a bad return value, which I'm pretty sure is 
something we don't want to do with such a vague commit log.

So please investigate a bit more and provide more info. Which part of 
booti_setup() call stack actually fails, why? Is there something we can 
or need to do to fix a specific corner case and only that corner case 
without breaking others?

Cheers,
Quentin