[U-Boot] [PATCH v9 2/2] Odroid-XU3: Add documentation for Odroid-XU3

[Sjoerd Simons <sjoerd.simons@collabora.co.uk>]

On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 09:39 +0100, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> Hi Sjoerd,
> 
> > On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 13:45 +0900, Hyungwon Hwang wrote:
> > > On Thu, 27 Nov 2014 15:33:05 +0100
> > > Sjoerd Simons <sjoerd.simons@collabora.co.uk> wrote:
> > 
> > > > signed_bl1_position=1
> > > > bl2_position=31
> > > > uboot_position=63
> > > > tzsw_position=719
> > > > env_position=1231
> > > > 
> > > > for the various locations.. Which also explains the limit 335872
> > > > bytes in your initial mail.. Awkward one though. Wonder if that's
> > > > an SoC issue or something hardkernel could fix by having a
> > > > different bl1/bl2?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > (719 - 63) * 512 = 335876 bytes. The limitation is needed not to
> > > overwrite tzsw.
> > > 
> > > Are you saying that the limitation can be removed? Yes, with
> > > different bl1/bl2. But I do not think that another bl1/bl2 will be
> > > released to relieve the limitation.
> > 
> > It was a something i was wondering. After send this e-mail i had a
> > chat with Mauro Ribeiro on #linux-exynos. He indicate that the BL2
> > determines the u-boot load location and that it's an u-boot SPL build
> > from their u-boot branch. Also he indicated that he would be happy to
> > sign a modified SPL build which e.g. loads u-boot from behind the
> > TZSW.
> > 
> > You can find the IRC log here:
> > http://irclog.whitequark.org/linux-exynos/2014-11-27
> > 
> > I have yet to take him up on that offer though, but it sounds like a
> > good way forward. The current layout really isn't practical.
> > 
> 
> It indeed isn't very practical, but this is what you received from
> HardKernel when you buy XU3 board.
> 
> Of course you can grab their sources, modify the layout, prepare
> u-boot's SPL and send it to them to be signed.
> However, it is not the way the "normal" user do things.
> 
> He or she would like to replace standard (and outdated) HardKernel
> u-boot on their SD card and go forward with booting kernel.

> For now we _must_ focus on supporting XU3 with default BL1/BL2 and hence
> we are obliged to have u-boot size smaller than 328 KiB.

I don't see a big issue with telling the "normal" user[0] to replace
both the BL2 and u-boot itself. If the hardkernel folks indeed do sign
the BL2 for us, i'm more then happy to make that publically available.


0: Do normal users replace u-boot?

-- 
Sjoerd Simons <sjoerd.simons@collabora.co.uk>
Collabora Ltd.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 6170 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20141128/62ac9358/attachment.bin>