From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Graf Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 11:36:08 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH 00/10] sunxi: Allwinner A64 SPL support In-Reply-To: References: <1478137001-847-1-git-send-email-andre.przywara@arm.com> <581AFA18.4040404@suse.de> <9b937016-4efb-4307-6afa-5537800efb18@redhat.com> Message-ID: <581B1318.7030401@suse.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 11/03/2016 10:51 AM, Andre Przywara wrote: > Hi, > > On 03/11/16 09:34, Hans de Goede wrote: >> > object my packaging ideas> >> >> Hi, >> >> First of all cool stuff! Thank you Andre and all others >> involved for making this happen. >> >> On 03-11-16 09:49, Alexander Graf wrote: >>> On 11/03/2016 02:36 AM, Andre Przywara wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> this is my first take on the SPL support for the Allwinner A64 SoC. >>>> The actual meat - the DRAM initialization code - has been provided >>>> by Jens - many thanks for that! >>>> The rest of the patches mostly deal with the 32-bit/64-bit switch. >>>> >>>> While it is possible and seems natural to let the SPL also run in >>>> 64-bit, >>>> this creates a really large binary (32600 Bytes in my case). With some >>>> hacks (plus some fixes to make the SPL 64-bit safe) I got this to work, >>> So how about we merge the 64bit version first (since that's *way* >>> easier to compile for everyone) and then consider the move to 32bit >>> afterwards? I don't even want to start to imagine how to squeeze a >>> 32bit SPL build into the build process for our U-Boot binaries. >>> >>>> but any addition will probably break it and exceed the 32KB limit that >>>> the BROM imposes. Debug is the first obvious victim here. >>> Do you have some section size comparisons between the two? >> Later down in the mail Andre says that in 32 bit (thumb) mode >> the size goes down to 20KB which gives us a lot more head-room >> then the 32600 out of 32768 bytes available for the 64 bit >> version. >> >> With that said I agree with you (Alex) that having a 32 bit >> SPL + 64 bit u-boot proper is worry-some from a distro pov. > What's even nastier is the requirement of a cross compiler even for a > native build. Do Fedora and Suse offer packaged cross-compilers for the > other ARM bitness, respectively? Andreas Faerber was working on cross compilers in openSUSE, but I don't think they're part of the distribution yet. Alex