From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Scott Wood Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 13:47:28 -0600 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v7 13/19] Makefile: u-boot-with-spl.bin: Fix SPL padding In-Reply-To: <1651663875.1556800.1361217130492.JavaMail.root@advansee.com> (from benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com on Mon Feb 18 13:52:10 2013) References: <1361216249.14186.19@snotra> <1651663875.1556800.1361217130492.JavaMail.root@advansee.com> Message-ID: <1361216848.14186.20@snotra> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 02/18/2013 01:52:10 PM, Beno?t Th?baudeau wrote: > On Monday, February 18, 2013 8:37:29 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > > On 02/17/2013 10:16:49 AM, Beno?t Th?baudeau wrote: > > > 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. > > OK. > > > > 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. > > Right, sorry, I meant CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_OFFS. It is 0, which is > not > compatible with the payload being appended to the SPL in the > programmed image. That just means we load the whole thing, including SPL, so that we're always loading from the start of the block. Note the difference between CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_DST and CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_START. -Scott