[U-Boot] [PATCH v7 13/19] Makefile: u-boot-with-spl.bin: Fix SPL padding

[Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>]

On 02/17/2013 10:16:49 AM, Beno?t Th?baudeau wrote:
> Hi Poonam, Andy,
> 
> On Friday, February 15, 2013 9:54:19 PM, Beno?t Th?baudeau wrote:
> > PAD_TO is not a generic SPL configuration option, so use  
> CONFIG_SPL_MAX_SIZE
> > instead.
> >
> > We want to use --pad-to with a size, but this option expects an  
> address, so
> > use
> > u-boot-spl.bin instead of u-boot-spl as the input file in order to  
> get
> > addresses
> > starting at 0.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Beno?t Th?baudeau <benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com>
> > ---
> > Changes in v7:
> >  - Use u-boot-spl.bin instead of u-boot-spl in order to avoid  
> having to use
> >    --change-addresses.
> >
> > Changes in v6:
> >  - Fix size passed to --pad-to thanks to --change-addresses.
> >
> > Changes in v5: None
> > Changes in v4:
> >  - New patch.
> >
> > Changes in v3: None
> > Changes in v2: None
> >
> >  Makefile |    3 ++-
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> > index a8c7b7b..317dffc 100644
> > --- a/Makefile
> > +++ b/Makefile
> > @@ -486,7 +486,8 @@ $(obj)u-boot.dis:	$(obj)u-boot
> >  		$(OBJDUMP) -d $< > $@
> >
> >  $(obj)u-boot-with-spl.bin: $(obj)spl/u-boot-spl.bin  
> $(obj)u-boot.bin
> > -		$(OBJCOPY) ${OBJCFLAGS} --pad-to=$(PAD_TO) -O binary  
> $(obj)spl/u-boot-spl
> > $(obj)spl/u-boot-spl-pad.bin
> > +		$(OBJCOPY) ${OBJCFLAGS} --pad-to=$(CONFIG_SPL_MAX_SIZE)  
> \
> > +			-I binary -O binary $<  
> $(obj)spl/u-boot-spl-pad.bin
> >  		cat $(obj)spl/u-boot-spl-pad.bin $(obj)u-boot.bin > $@
> >  		rm $(obj)spl/u-boot-spl-pad.bin
> 
> I would like to let you know what is going on, and to get your  
> feedback for this
> patch.
> 
> include/configs/p1_p2_rdb_pc.h seems to be the only current user of
> u-boot-with-spl.bin, triggered for example by the P2020RDB-PC_NAND  
> config.
> 
> Before this patch, PAD_TO was used, but there is no such definition  
> for this
> board for generic SPL, so this board seems broken,

"--pad-to=" with no argument behaves the same as "--pad-to=0", though  
since it's undocumented we now avoid relying on that behavior as you  
observed in a followup post.

> all the more none of the
> various values defined for CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE relatively to
> CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE would be compatible with an image built by  
> appending U-Boot
> to the generic SPL. Can you confirm?

I don't follow.  CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE is for where the payload gets  
loaded to, and has nothing to do with its position in the SPL-concat  
image, nor with the address that the SPL starts running at.

-Scott