omap-common: Common boot code OMAP3 support and cleanup

board/nokia/rx51/lowlevel_init.S +0 -5

index 9d4ea1b..9048f31 100644
@@ -28,18 +28,6 @@ imagesize:		/* maximal size of image */
 ih_magic:		/* IH_MAGIC in big endian from include/image.h */
 	.word 0x56190527
 
-/*
- * Routine: save_boot_params (called after reset from start.S)
- * Description: Copy attached kernel to address KERNEL_ADDRESS
- *              Copy u-boot to address CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE
- *              Return to copied u-boot address

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

Quoted 3 lines · On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f (see other email thread). Until somebody fix that broken commit, I cannot test your new patches in qemu or on (real) Nokia N900.

Quoted 5 lines · On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 3 lines

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

Quoted 3 lines

So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f (see other email thread). Until somebody fix that broken commit, I cannot test your new patches in qemu or on (real) Nokia N900.

Now I tested this patch series on top of u-boot master with applied my patch "Nokia RX-51: Fix calculating return address in save_boot_params".

And it really as I thought broke booting U-Boot on Nokia N900 in qemu.

So this patch series is NAK from my side.

Le mardi 09 juin 2015 ? 20:34 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 10 lines · On Tuesday 09 June 2015 18:28:29 Pali Roh?r wrote:

Quoted 8 lines · On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 3 lines

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f (see other email thread). Until somebody fix that broken commit, I cannot test your new patches in qemu or on (real) Nokia N900.

Quoted 4 lines

Now I tested this patch series on top of u-boot master with applied my patch "Nokia RX-51: Fix calculating return address in save_boot_params".

And it really as I thought broke booting U-Boot on Nokia N900 in qemu.

I'm confused here -- did you try booting on the actual device or in qemu?

Quoted 1 line

So this patch series is NAK from my side.

Thanks for testing. Of course, the point is to make another version of the patch set that fits the N900 too, since we really need to integrate the omap3 to the common omap boot mechanism anyways.

I may be able to get my hands on a N900 in a short while.

If you're interested, you're welcome to look at the issue and suggest what changes should be made to make the set compatible with the N900!

Quoted 11 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 11:54:00 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Le mardi 09 juin 2015 ? 20:34 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 10 lines · On Tuesday 09 June 2015 18:28:29 Pali Roh?r wrote:

Quoted 8 lines · On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 3 lines

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f (see other email thread). Until somebody fix that broken commit, I cannot test your new patches in qemu or on (real) Nokia N900.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 4 lines

Now I tested this patch series on top of u-boot master with applied my patch "Nokia RX-51: Fix calculating return address in save_boot_params".

And it really as I thought broke booting U-Boot on Nokia N900 in qemu.

I'm confused here -- did you try booting on the actual device or in qemu?

I tested your changes only in qemu. But because you removed (or better masked) required lowlevel asm code, it will not work on real n900 too.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line

So this patch series is NAK from my side.

Thanks for testing. Of course, the point is to make another version of the patch set that fits the N900 too, since we really need to integrate the omap3 to the common omap boot mechanism anyways.

Make sure that asm function in rx51 lowlevel asm file is called immediately from start.S. It is required. Basically no modification to that function should be needed (maybe just fixing return address in lr).

Quoted 1 line

I may be able to get my hands on a N900 in a short while.

Do you have n900 device? Or are you going to use qemu?

Really, for development u-boot for n900 is easier to use qemu as you can easier debug code...

Quoted 3 lines

If you're interested, you're welcome to look at the issue and suggest what changes should be made to make the set compatible with the N900!

Do not hide/mask/remove that required asm function. That should be all.

Quoted 26 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 11:54:00 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 11 lines

Le mardi 09 juin 2015 ? 20:34 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 10 lines · On Tuesday 09 June 2015 18:28:29 Pali Roh?r wrote:

Quoted 8 lines · On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 3 lines

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f (see other email thread). Until somebody fix that broken commit, I cannot test your new patches in qemu or on (real) Nokia N900.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 4 lines

Now I tested this patch series on top of u-boot master with applied my patch "Nokia RX-51: Fix calculating return address in save_boot_params".

And it really as I thought broke booting U-Boot on Nokia N900 in qemu.

I'm confused here -- did you try booting on the actual device or in qemu?

I tested your changes only in qemu. But because you removed (or better masked) required lowlevel asm code, it will not work on real n900 too.

Quoted 2 lines

Quoted 1 line

So this patch series is NAK from my side.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 4 lines

Thanks for testing. Of course, the point is to make another version of the patch set that fits the N900 too, since we really need to integrate the omap3 to the common omap boot mechanism anyways.

Make sure that asm function in rx51 lowlevel asm file is called immediately from start.S. It is required. Basically no modification to that function should be needed (maybe just fixing return address in lr).

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line

I may be able to get my hands on a N900 in a short while.

Do you have n900 device? Or are you going to use qemu?

Really, for development u-boot for n900 is easier to use qemu as you can easier debug code...

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 3 lines

If you're interested, you're welcome to look at the issue and suggest what changes should be made to make the set compatible with the N900!

Do not hide/mask/remove that required asm function. That should be all.

And why is change to file board/nokia/rx51/lowlevel_init.S required?

Le mercredi 10 juin 2015 ? 12:42 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 32 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 12:34:39 Pali Roh?r wrote:

Quoted 31 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 11:54:00 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 11 lines

Le mardi 09 juin 2015 ? 20:34 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 10 lines · On Tuesday 09 June 2015 18:28:29 Pali Roh?r wrote:

Quoted 8 lines · On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 3 lines

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f (see other email thread). Until somebody fix that broken commit, I cannot test your new patches in qemu or on (real) Nokia N900.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 4 lines

Now I tested this patch series on top of u-boot master with applied my patch "Nokia RX-51: Fix calculating return address in save_boot_params".

And it really as I thought broke booting U-Boot on Nokia N900 in qemu.

I'm confused here -- did you try booting on the actual device or in qemu?

I tested your changes only in qemu. But because you removed (or better masked) required lowlevel asm code, it will not work on real n900 too.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line

So this patch series is NAK from my side.

Thanks for testing. Of course, the point is to make another version of the patch set that fits the N900 too, since we really need to integrate the omap3 to the common omap boot mechanism anyways.

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Make sure that asm function in rx51 lowlevel asm file is called immediately from start.S. It is required. Basically no modification to that function should be needed (maybe just fixing return address in lr).

The problem is that this declaration conflicts with the one from omap-common's lowlevel_init.S. I understand that it is not needed for the RX-51 since it is not loaded by the U-Boot SPL or by the bootrom.

Perhaps the best way to do things here would be to have a config option clearly stating that it should not expect the booting device information structure in r0. This situation is not specific to the RX-51 anyways.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line

I may be able to get my hands on a N900 in a short while.

Do you have n900 device? Or are you going to use qemu?

Really, for development u-boot for n900 is easier to use qemu as you can easier debug code...

I didin't know it was possible, perhaps I'll try it. I have a friend who owns a N900, I could certainly borrow it for a while to ensure that this patch set goes smoothly on it.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 3 lines

If you're interested, you're welcome to look at the issue and suggest what changes should be made to make the set compatible with the N900!

Do not hide/mask/remove that required asm function. That should be all.

And why is change to file board/nokia/rx51/lowlevel_init.S required?

See my comment above.

Quoted 33 lines

Le mercredi 10 juin 2015 ? 12:42 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 32 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 12:34:39 Pali Roh?r wrote:

Quoted 31 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 11:54:00 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 11 lines

Le mardi 09 juin 2015 ? 20:34 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 10 lines · On Tuesday 09 June 2015 18:28:29 Pali Roh?r wrote:

Quoted 8 lines · On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 3 lines

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f (see other email thread). Until somebody fix that broken commit, I cannot test your new patches in qemu or on (real) Nokia N900.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 4 lines

Now I tested this patch series on top of u-boot master with applied my patch "Nokia RX-51: Fix calculating return address in save_boot_params".

And it really as I thought broke booting U-Boot on Nokia N900 in qemu.

I'm confused here -- did you try booting on the actual device or in qemu?

I tested your changes only in qemu. But because you removed (or better masked) required lowlevel asm code, it will not work on real n900 too.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line

So this patch series is NAK from my side.

Thanks for testing. Of course, the point is to make another version of the patch set that fits the N900 too, since we really need to integrate the omap3 to the common omap boot mechanism anyways.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Make sure that asm function in rx51 lowlevel asm file is called immediately from start.S. It is required. Basically no modification to that function should be needed (maybe just fixing return address in lr).

The problem is that this declaration conflicts with the one from omap-common's lowlevel_init.S. I understand that it is not needed for the RX-51 since it is not loaded by the U-Boot SPL or by the bootrom.

Yes.

Quoted 3 lines

Perhaps the best way to do things here would be to have a config option clearly stating that it should not expect the booting device information structure in r0. This situation is not specific to the RX-51 anyways.

Sounds good.

Le mercredi 10 juin 2015 ? 13:35 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 49 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 12:58:11 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 33 lines

Le mercredi 10 juin 2015 ? 12:42 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 32 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 12:34:39 Pali Roh?r wrote:

Quoted 31 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 11:54:00 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 11 lines

Le mardi 09 juin 2015 ? 20:34 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 10 lines · On Tuesday 09 June 2015 18:28:29 Pali Roh?r wrote:

Quoted 8 lines · On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 3 lines

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f (see other email thread). Until somebody fix that broken commit, I cannot test your new patches in qemu or on (real) Nokia N900.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 4 lines

Now I tested this patch series on top of u-boot master with applied my patch "Nokia RX-51: Fix calculating return address in save_boot_params".

And it really as I thought broke booting U-Boot on Nokia N900 in qemu.

I'm confused here -- did you try booting on the actual device or in qemu?

I tested your changes only in qemu. But because you removed (or better masked) required lowlevel asm code, it will not work on real n900 too.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line

So this patch series is NAK from my side.

Thanks for testing. Of course, the point is to make another version of the patch set that fits the N900 too, since we really need to integrate the omap3 to the common omap boot mechanism anyways.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Make sure that asm function in rx51 lowlevel asm file is called immediately from start.S. It is required. Basically no modification to that function should be needed (maybe just fixing return address in lr).

The problem is that this declaration conflicts with the one from omap-common's lowlevel_init.S. I understand that it is not needed for the RX-51 since it is not loaded by the U-Boot SPL or by the bootrom.

Yes.

Quoted 3 lines

Perhaps the best way to do things here would be to have a config option clearly stating that it should not expect the booting device information structure in r0. This situation is not specific to the RX-51 anyways.

Quoted 1 line

Sounds good.

I just sent out v3 that fixes n900 support the way I suggested. I was able to get my hands on the device and along with the patch you sent out earlier this week, everything seems to work fine.

Quoted 50 lines

Le mercredi 10 juin 2015 ? 13:35 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 49 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 12:58:11 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 33 lines

Le mercredi 10 juin 2015 ? 12:42 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 32 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 12:34:39 Pali Roh?r wrote:

Quoted 31 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 11:54:00 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 11 lines

Le mardi 09 juin 2015 ? 20:34 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 10 lines · On Tuesday 09 June 2015 18:28:29 Pali Roh?r wrote:

Quoted 8 lines · On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 3 lines

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f (see other email thread). Until somebody fix that broken commit, I cannot test your new patches in qemu or on (real) Nokia N900.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 4 lines

Now I tested this patch series on top of u-boot master with applied my patch "Nokia RX-51: Fix calculating return address in save_boot_params".

And it really as I thought broke booting U-Boot on Nokia N900 in qemu.

I'm confused here -- did you try booting on the actual device or in qemu?

I tested your changes only in qemu. But because you removed (or better masked) required lowlevel asm code, it will not work on real n900 too.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line

So this patch series is NAK from my side.

Thanks for testing. Of course, the point is to make another version of the patch set that fits the N900 too, since we really need to integrate the omap3 to the common omap boot mechanism anyways.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Make sure that asm function in rx51 lowlevel asm file is called immediately from start.S. It is required. Basically no modification to that function should be needed (maybe just fixing return address in lr).

The problem is that this declaration conflicts with the one from omap-common's lowlevel_init.S. I understand that it is not needed for the RX-51 since it is not loaded by the U-Boot SPL or by the bootrom.

Yes.

Quoted 3 lines

Perhaps the best way to do things here would be to have a config option clearly stating that it should not expect the booting device information structure in r0. This situation is not specific to the RX-51 anyways.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line

Sounds good.

I just sent out v3 that fixes n900 support the way I suggested. I was able to get my hands on the device and along with the patch you sent out earlier this week, everything seems to work fine.

Hello,

have you also tested that "combined" image of u-boot and linux kernel (in uImage format) is working fine? That u-boot can boot that "attached" kernel image without problem.

Script for generating "combined" image from u-boot.bin and uImage kernel:
https://gitorious.org/u-boot-shr/u-boot/source/maemo:debian/u-boot-gen-combined

You can boot "attached" kernel via u-boot command "run attachboot".

Le vendredi 12 juin 2015 ? 13:56 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 60 lines · On Friday 12 June 2015 13:32:56 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 50 lines

Le mercredi 10 juin 2015 ? 13:35 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 49 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 12:58:11 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 33 lines

Le mercredi 10 juin 2015 ? 12:42 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 32 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 12:34:39 Pali Roh?r wrote:

Quoted 31 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 11:54:00 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 11 lines

Le mardi 09 juin 2015 ? 20:34 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 10 lines · On Tuesday 09 June 2015 18:28:29 Pali Roh?r wrote:

Quoted 8 lines · On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 3 lines

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f (see other email thread). Until somebody fix that broken commit, I cannot test your new patches in qemu or on (real) Nokia N900.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 4 lines

Now I tested this patch series on top of u-boot master with applied my patch "Nokia RX-51: Fix calculating return address in save_boot_params".

And it really as I thought broke booting U-Boot on Nokia N900 in qemu.

I'm confused here -- did you try booting on the actual device or in qemu?

I tested your changes only in qemu. But because you removed (or better masked) required lowlevel asm code, it will not work on real n900 too.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line

So this patch series is NAK from my side.

Thanks for testing. Of course, the point is to make another version of the patch set that fits the N900 too, since we really need to integrate the omap3 to the common omap boot mechanism anyways.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Make sure that asm function in rx51 lowlevel asm file is called immediately from start.S. It is required. Basically no modification to that function should be needed (maybe just fixing return address in lr).

The problem is that this declaration conflicts with the one from omap-common's lowlevel_init.S. I understand that it is not needed for the RX-51 since it is not loaded by the U-Boot SPL or by the bootrom.

Yes.

Quoted 3 lines

Perhaps the best way to do things here would be to have a config option clearly stating that it should not expect the booting device information structure in r0. This situation is not specific to the RX-51 anyways.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line

Sounds good.

I just sent out v3 that fixes n900 support the way I suggested. I was able to get my hands on the device and along with the patch you sent out earlier this week, everything seems to work fine.

Hello,

Quoted 8 lines

have you also tested that "combined" image of u-boot and linux kernel (in uImage format) is working fine? That u-boot can boot that "attached" kernel image without problem.

Script for generating "combined" image from u-boot.bin and uImage kernel:
https://gitorious.org/u-boot-shr/u-boot/source/maemo:debian/u-boot-gen-combined

You can boot "attached" kernel via u-boot command "run attachboot".

I haven't tried that, but since I have removed the changes I added to the rx51-specific lowlevel_init.S, I expect that nothing should have changed on this side.

I do not have serial on the device, so it's harder for me to figure out whether a kernel will run fine (I would need a graphical indication on the screen).

You're welcome to test that it still works, though.

Quoted 78 lines

Le vendredi 12 juin 2015 ? 13:56 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 60 lines · On Friday 12 June 2015 13:32:56 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 50 lines

Le mercredi 10 juin 2015 ? 13:35 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 49 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 12:58:11 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 33 lines

Le mercredi 10 juin 2015 ? 12:42 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 32 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 12:34:39 Pali Roh?r wrote:

Quoted 31 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 11:54:00 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 11 lines

Le mardi 09 juin 2015 ? 20:34 +0200, Pali Roh?r a ?crit :

Quoted 10 lines · On Tuesday 09 June 2015 18:28:29 Pali Roh?r wrote:

Quoted 8 lines · On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

Quoted 3 lines

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f (see other email thread). Until somebody fix that broken commit, I cannot test your new patches in qemu or on (real) Nokia N900.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 4 lines

Now I tested this patch series on top of u-boot master with applied my patch "Nokia RX-51: Fix calculating return address in save_boot_params".

And it really as I thought broke booting U-Boot on Nokia N900 in qemu.

I'm confused here -- did you try booting on the actual device or in qemu?

I tested your changes only in qemu. But because you removed (or better masked) required lowlevel asm code, it will not work on real n900 too.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line

So this patch series is NAK from my side.

Thanks for testing. Of course, the point is to make another version of the patch set that fits the N900 too, since we really need to integrate the omap3 to the common omap boot mechanism anyways.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Make sure that asm function in rx51 lowlevel asm file is called immediately from start.S. It is required. Basically no modification to that function should be needed (maybe just fixing return address in lr).

The problem is that this declaration conflicts with the one from omap-common's lowlevel_init.S. I understand that it is not needed for the RX-51 since it is not loaded by the U-Boot SPL or by the bootrom.

Yes.

Quoted 3 lines

Perhaps the best way to do things here would be to have a config option clearly stating that it should not expect the booting device information structure in r0. This situation is not specific to the RX-51 anyways.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line

Sounds good.

I just sent out v3 that fixes n900 support the way I suggested. I was able to get my hands on the device and along with the patch you sent out earlier this week, everything seems to work fine.

Hello,

Quoted 8 lines

have you also tested that "combined" image of u-boot and linux kernel (in uImage format) is working fine? That u-boot can boot that "attached" kernel image without problem.

Script for generating "combined" image from u-boot.bin and uImage kernel:
https://gitorious.org/u-boot-shr/u-boot/source/maemo:debian/u-boot-gen-combined

You can boot "attached" kernel via u-boot command "run attachboot".

I haven't tried that, but since I have removed the changes I added to the rx51-specific lowlevel_init.S, I expect that nothing should have changed on this side.

I do not have serial on the device, so it's harder for me to figure out whether a kernel will run fine (I would need a graphical indication on the screen).

Quoted 2 lines

You're welcome to test that it still works, though.

If you compile fbdev into kernel image then you should see something on screen... But I will try to test new patch series at the weekend.

Quoted 3 lines · On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f (see other email thread

). Until somebody fix that broken commit, I cannot test your new patches in qemu or on (real) Nokia N900.

Quoted 8 lines · Pali Roh?r

Quoted 4 lines · On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f (see other email thread

Would be nice if you added a link to the thread in some mail archive
...

Quoted 2 lines

). Until somebody fix that broken commit, I cannot test your new patches in qemu or on (real) Nokia N900.

What about you fixing it ? ;-)

Best regards,
Marek Vasut

Quoted 7 lines · Pali Roh?r

Quoted 3 lines · On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f (see other email thread

Would be nice if you added a link to the thread in some mail archive ...

Quoted 2 lines

). Until somebody fix that broken commit, I cannot test your new patches in qemu or on (real) Nokia N900.

What about you fixing it ? ;-)

Quoted 1 line · Marek Vasut

What about you fixing it ? ;-)

Traditionally, regressions are fixed by whoever caused then, not whoever was patient enough to bisect them...

Quoted 7 lines · Pali Roh?r

Quoted 3 lines · On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f (see other email thread

Would be nice if you added a link to the thread in some mail archive ...

Quoted 6 lines · On Wednesday 10 June 2015 06:27:37 Marek Vasut wrote:

Quoted 5 lines · Pali Roh?r

Quoted 3 lines · On Monday 08 June 2015 23:24:18 Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

I would be very glad to see board maintainers give a go at the changeset before it gets merged, especially on devices like the Nokia RX-51 (N900) where some specific adaptation was needed.

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 2 lines

So U-Boot is broken since e11c6c279d823dc0d2f470c5c2e3c0a9854a640f (see other email thread

Would be nice if you added a link to the thread in some mail archive ...

What about searching for last emails ;-)

It took me less then minute:
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2015-June/216237.html

Patch with my fix there:
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2015-June/216241.html