From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andre Przywara Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2013 21:57:16 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] "arm: keep all sections in ELF file" breaks Arndale In-Reply-To: <20131221114635.1fa82bba@lilith> References: <52B06CA1.3020303@linaro.org> <52B06E0A.1020507@ti.com> <52B071FA.8010806@calxeda.com> <52B0747C.9070503@ti.com> <52B1ABCC.8080000@linaro.org> <20131221114635.1fa82bba@lilith> Message-ID: <52B600AC.6010105@linaro.org> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 12/21/2013 11:46 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > Hi Andre, > > On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 15:06:04 +0100, Andre Przywara > wrote: > >> On 12/17/2013 04:57 PM, Tom Rini wrote: >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> Hash: SHA1 >>> >>> On 12/17/2013 10:47 AM, Andre Przywara wrote: >>>> (CCing Inderpal, Chander and Minkyu) >>>> >>>> On 12/17/2013 04:30 PM, Tom Rini wrote: >>>> On 12/17/2013 10:24 AM, Andre Przywara wrote: >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> the Arndale board does not work anymore with current master HEAD. >>>>>>> If I turn on the board, I see exactly nothing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I bisected it down to: >>>>>>> 47ed5dd031d7d2c587e6afd386e79ccec1a1b7f7 is the first bad commit >>>>>>> commit 47ed5dd031d7d2c587e6afd386e79ccec1a1b7f7 >>>>>>> Author: Albert ARIBAUD >>>>>>> Date: Thu Nov 7 14:21:46 2013 +0100 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> arm: keep all sections in ELF file >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That patch looks like Chinese to me, does one of you have an idea what's >>>>>>> wrong here? >>>>>>> Are we missing a section, maybe for the SPL build? >>>> >>>> So on Arndale, what file do you boot exactly? It sounds like not >>>> u-boot.img but some tool stripping / modifying u-boot (or >>>> spl/u-boot-spl) and having relied on certain sections being stripped out >>>> before being run. >>>> >>>>> Good point. Indeed I boot u-boot-dtb.bin (the SPL is >>>>> spl/arndale-spl.bin). So the Makefile does: >>>>> cat u-boot.bin u-boot.dtb >u-boot-dtb.bin >>>> >>>>> I guess the address under which U-boot expects to find the attached dtb >>>>> changes due to the non-discarding. >>>> >>>>> Does any of the Arndale people have an idea how to fix this? >>> >>> That's a little confusing as we use objcopy -O binary to make >>> u-boot.bin/u-boot-spl.bin and that would, I would think, drop these >>> sections anyhow. But some checking of binary size with the patch in >>> question locally reverted would help shed some light here. >> >> So I did objdump -h on ./u-boot, the diff (sorted by the section name, >> as the order of the section differed, and the size) is: >> >> .ARM.attributes 0000002d >> -.bss 00048b10 >> +.bss 00048b08 >> .bss_end 00000000 >> .bss_start 00000000 >> .comment 0000001c >> @@ -14,8 +14,12 @@ >> .debug_loc 00045a4e >> .debug_ranges 00006f70 >> .debug_str 000123b4 >> +.dynamic 00000080 >> +.dynstr 0000001d >> +.dynsym 00000060 >> .got.plt 0000000c >> .hash 0000002c >> +.interp 00000011 >> .rel.dyn 00006fd8 >> .rodata 0000ae47 >> .text 0002cdf0 >> >> - works, + is broken. >> + is HEAD as of yesterday, - is the same with the patch in question >> reverted. So the patch _adds_ some sections to the file. >> u-boot-spl is exactly the same, for u-boot-spl.bin the broken version >> ends earlier (but until then is identical). arndale-spl.bin (which I >> flash) is different, though. >> Arndale uses CONFIG_OF_SEPARATE, and .text stays the same AFAICS. >> >> I can do some more debugging tomorrow, am grateful for any hints. > > Sorry for chiming in late. Did you try this? > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/300928/ I cannot reach the server. Can you give me a hint what this patch is about (or a Subject: line to search for on the ML?) Thanks, Andre.