From: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] spl: Use standard FIT entries
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2020 10:27:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <97da80b5-45f9-1cc9-493d-48bbcb8695ae@xilinx.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPnjgZ35NFCZ61nJoHWO_=cXrkj7VKpKp4Z429pAOyMhKMQGrw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Simon,
On 07. 09. 20 3:43, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Michal,
>
> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 at 05:03, Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com> wrote:
>>
>> SPL is creating fit-images DT node when loadables are recorded in selected
>> configuration. Entries which are created are using entry-point and
>> load-addr property names. But there shouldn't be a need to use non standard
>> properties because entry/load are standard FIT properties. But using
>> standard FIT properties enables option to use generic FIT functions to
>> descrease SPL size. Here is result for ZynqMP virt configuration:
>> xilinx_zynqmp_virt: spl/u-boot-spl:all -82 spl/u-boot-spl:rodata -22 spl/u-boot-spl:text -60
>>
>> The patch causes change in run time fit image record.
>> Before:
>> fit-images {
>> uboot {
>> os = "u-boot";
>> type = "firmware";
>> size = <0xfd520>;
>> entry-point = <0x8000000>;
>> load-addr = <0x8000000>;
>> };
>> };
>>
>> After:
>> fit-images {
>> uboot {
>> os = "u-boot";
>> type = "firmware";
>> size = <0xfd520>;
>> entry = <0x8000000>;
>> load = <0x8000000>;
>> };
>> };
>>
>> Replacing calling fdt_getprop_u32() by fit_image_get_entry/load() also
>> enables support for reading entry/load properties recorded in 64bit format.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>
>> ---
>
> Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
>
> Isn't there a test that could be updated here?
Are we testing SPL flow?
>
>>
>> Would be good to know history of fit-images and it's property names but
>> there shouldn't be a need to use non standard names where we have
>> FIT_*_PROP recorded as macros in include/image.h.
>
> I agree.
>
>> Concern regarding backward compatibility is definitely valid but not sure
>> how many systems can be affected by this change.
>
> Me neither. Probably a good idea to fix it.
Fix means keep existing code with warning and add new one next to it.
M
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-07 8:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-03 11:03 [PATCH 0/2] Add support for loading images above 4GB Michal Simek
2020-09-03 11:03 ` [PATCH 1/2] spl: Use standard FIT entries Michal Simek
2020-09-07 1:43 ` Simon Glass
2020-09-07 8:27 ` Michal Simek [this message]
2020-09-07 13:57 ` Simon Glass
2020-09-03 11:03 ` [PATCH 2/2] spl: fdt: Record load/entry fit-images entries in 64bit format Michal Simek
2020-09-07 1:43 ` Simon Glass
2020-09-07 8:29 ` Michal Simek
2020-09-07 13:57 ` Simon Glass
2020-10-05 8:55 ` Michal Simek
2020-09-07 8:55 ` Michal Simek
2020-09-03 11:16 ` [PATCH 0/2] Add support for loading images above 4GB Heinrich Schuchardt
2020-09-03 12:30 ` Michal Simek
2020-09-07 1:43 ` Simon Glass
2020-09-07 9:00 ` Michal Simek
2020-09-07 13:57 ` Simon Glass
2020-10-05 8:56 ` Michal Simek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=97da80b5-45f9-1cc9-493d-48bbcb8695ae@xilinx.com \
--to=michal.simek@xilinx.com \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox