omap-common: Common boot code OMAP3 support and SYS_BOOT-based fallback boot device

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.