| Message ID | 1329787975-6695-8-git-send-email-sjg@chromium.org |
|---|---|
| State | Deferred |
| Delegated to: | Tom Rini |
| Headers | show |
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 05:32:49PM -0800, Simon Glass wrote: > This fixes the following warnings in an SPL build when libcommon is > in use: > > spl.c:37: warning: 'gdata' defined but not used > spl.c:38: warning: 'bdata' defined but not used > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> Acked-by: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
hi Simon, On Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 05:32:49PM -0800, Simon Glass wrote: > This fixes the following warnings in an SPL build when libcommon is > in use: > > spl.c:37: warning: 'gdata' defined but not used > spl.c:38: warning: 'bdata' defined but not used > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> > --- > Changes in v4: > - Add new patch to fix davinci build warnings > > arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c | 2 ++ > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c > index b1eff26..2861907 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c > +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c > @@ -32,10 +32,12 @@ > > #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD > DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > /* Define global data structure pointer to it*/ > static gd_t gdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); > static bd_t bdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); > +#endif Can you specify which boards you get this warning for. With your patch to add libcommon to hawkboard's spl image, this is now also needed for hawkboard which uses CONFIG_SPL_NAND_LOAD. -sughosh
Hi Sughosh, On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh@gmail.com> wrote: > hi Simon, > > On Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 05:32:49PM -0800, Simon Glass wrote: >> This fixes the following warnings in an SPL build when libcommon is >> in use: >> >> spl.c:37: warning: 'gdata' defined but not used >> spl.c:38: warning: 'bdata' defined but not used >> >> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> >> --- >> Changes in v4: >> - Add new patch to fix davinci build warnings >> >> arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c | 2 ++ >> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c >> index b1eff26..2861907 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c >> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c >> @@ -32,10 +32,12 @@ >> >> #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD >> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >> /* Define global data structure pointer to it*/ >> static gd_t gdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); >> static bd_t bdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); >> +#endif > > Can you specify which boards you get this warning for. With your > patch to add libcommon to hawkboard's spl image, this is now also > needed for hawkboard which uses CONFIG_SPL_NAND_LOAD. Perhaps it is any davinci board, with SPI? I don't have any of these - I was just fixing what I thought was a minor #ifdef bug in the code. Regards, Simon > > -sughosh
hi Simon, On Sun Feb 26, 2012 at 09:56:37AM -0800, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Sughosh, > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh@gmail.com> wrote: > > hi Simon, > > > > On Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 05:32:49PM -0800, Simon Glass wrote: > >> This fixes the following warnings in an SPL build when libcommon is > >> in use: > >> > >> spl.c:37: warning: 'gdata' defined but not used > >> spl.c:38: warning: 'bdata' defined but not used > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> > >> --- > >> Changes in v4: > >> - Add new patch to fix davinci build warnings > >> > >> arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c | 2 ++ > >> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c > >> index b1eff26..2861907 100644 > >> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c > >> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c > >> @@ -32,10 +32,12 @@ > >> > >> #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT > >> > >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD > >> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > >> /* Define global data structure pointer to it*/ > >> static gd_t gdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); > >> static bd_t bdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); > >> +#endif > > > > Can you specify which boards you get this warning for. With your > > patch to add libcommon to hawkboard's spl image, this is now also > > needed for hawkboard which uses CONFIG_SPL_NAND_LOAD. > > Perhaps it is any davinci board, with SPI? I don't have any of these - > I was just fixing what I thought was a minor #ifdef bug in the code. I checked the configs for all the davinci boards, and cam_enc_4xx, da850* and hawkboard use spl. Out of these the da850* use a spi flash, while cam_enc_4xx and hawkboard both use a nand. So we should not be using the CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD check to exclude the gdata and bdata objects -- these are now needed after adding the libcommon support to the hawkboard. Also, the cam_enc_4xx board which uses a spl does not have CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT and CONFIG_SPL_LIBGENERIC_SUPPORT defined and this patchset does not add these defines for the board. Was adding these defines for the board missed out. If so, then this patch would no longer be needed. -sughosh
Hi, On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh@gmail.com> wrote: > hi Simon, > > On Sun Feb 26, 2012 at 09:56:37AM -0800, Simon Glass wrote: >> Hi Sughosh, >> >> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh@gmail.com> wrote: >> > hi Simon, >> > >> > On Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 05:32:49PM -0800, Simon Glass wrote: >> >> This fixes the following warnings in an SPL build when libcommon is >> >> in use: >> >> >> >> spl.c:37: warning: 'gdata' defined but not used >> >> spl.c:38: warning: 'bdata' defined but not used >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> >> >> --- >> >> Changes in v4: >> >> - Add new patch to fix davinci build warnings >> >> >> >> arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c | 2 ++ >> >> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c >> >> index b1eff26..2861907 100644 >> >> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c >> >> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c >> >> @@ -32,10 +32,12 @@ >> >> >> >> #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT >> >> >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD >> >> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >> >> /* Define global data structure pointer to it*/ >> >> static gd_t gdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); >> >> static bd_t bdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); >> >> +#endif In arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c gdata and bdata are used for serial_init() to allow output to the console from the SPL. However, this is only the case when LIBCOMMON is used. LIBCOMMON is required for booting from SPI, but not for booting from NAND. Up to now davinci boards that boot from NAND with SPL did not use LIBCOMMON but used the puts and putc functions defined in spl.c for console output. >> > Can you specify which boards you get this warning for. With your >> > patch to add libcommon to hawkboard's spl image, this is now also >> > needed for hawkboard which uses CONFIG_SPL_NAND_LOAD. Simon's patch is for the hawkboard, since due to another patch in his patchset LIBCOMMON is enabled in hawkboard's SPL. Now we have a board that boots from NAND with SPL and has LIBCOMMON enabled (Simon, I did not check the rest of your patchset, why do you need LIBCOMMON on the hawkboard at all?) However, the patch fixes the warning, but now we use putc and puts from LIBCOMMON without initializing them. Thus it breaks the console output of the hawkboard SPL. So the correct solution would be to keep the ifdefs around the definition of gdata and bdata as they are, but change board_init_f() like this: void board_init_r(gd_t *id, ulong dummy) { #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT mem_malloc_init(CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE - CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_LEN, CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_LEN); gd = &gdata; gd->bd = &bdata; gd->flags |= GD_FLG_RELOC; gd->baudrate = CONFIG_BAUDRATE; serial_init(); /* serial communications setup */ gd->have_console = 1; #endif #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_NAND_LOAD nand_init(); puts("Nand boot...\n"); nand_boot(); #endif #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD puts("SPI boot...\n"); spi_boot(); #endif } Regards, Christian
hi Christian, On Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 11:39:42AM +0100, Christian Riesch wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh@gmail.com> wrote: <snip> > >> >> arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c | 2 ++ > >> >> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >> >> > >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c > >> >> index b1eff26..2861907 100644 > >> >> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c > >> >> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c > >> >> @@ -32,10 +32,12 @@ > >> >> > >> >> #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT > >> >> > >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD > >> >> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > >> >> /* Define global data structure pointer to it*/ > >> >> static gd_t gdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); > >> >> static bd_t bdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); > >> >> +#endif <snip> > >> > Can you specify which boards you get this warning for. With your > >> > patch to add libcommon to hawkboard's spl image, this is now also > >> > needed for hawkboard which uses CONFIG_SPL_NAND_LOAD. > > Simon's patch is for the hawkboard, since due to another patch in his > patchset LIBCOMMON is enabled in hawkboard's SPL. Now we have a board > that boots from NAND with SPL and has LIBCOMMON enabled (Simon, I did > not check the rest of your patchset, why do you need LIBCOMMON on the > hawkboard at all?) LIBCOMMON is now needed as the generic relocation based functions are part of the libcommon.o, which are being enabled in the same patchset for all arm boards. So if i understand correct, all arm board based spl's now need libcommon and libgeneric. The only thing i see is that libcommon and libgeneric are not defined for cam_enc_4xx board which uses spl, and this patchset does not add it either. Not sure whether it got missed. > However, the patch fixes the warning, but now we use putc and puts > from LIBCOMMON without initializing them. Thus it breaks the console > output of the hawkboard SPL. > > So the correct solution would be to keep the ifdefs around the > definition of gdata and bdata as they are, but change board_init_f() > like this: I have a patch for this, which i will send today. There is only one question i have though. > > void board_init_r(gd_t *id, ulong dummy) > { > #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT > mem_malloc_init(CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE - CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_LEN, > CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_LEN); Can you please explain why we need the mem_malloc_init. I did not include this, and spl boots up just fine on my board. -sughosh
Hi Sughosh, On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh@gmail.com> wrote: > hi Christian, > > On Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 11:39:42AM +0100, Christian Riesch wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh@gmail.com> wrote: > > <snip> > >> >> >> arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c | 2 ++ >> >> >> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> >> >> >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c >> >> >> index b1eff26..2861907 100644 >> >> >> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c >> >> >> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c >> >> >> @@ -32,10 +32,12 @@ >> >> >> >> >> >> #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT >> >> >> >> >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD >> >> >> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >> >> >> /* Define global data structure pointer to it*/ >> >> >> static gd_t gdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); >> >> >> static bd_t bdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); >> >> >> +#endif > > <snip> > >> >> > Can you specify which boards you get this warning for. With your >> >> > patch to add libcommon to hawkboard's spl image, this is now also >> >> > needed for hawkboard which uses CONFIG_SPL_NAND_LOAD. >> >> Simon's patch is for the hawkboard, since due to another patch in his >> patchset LIBCOMMON is enabled in hawkboard's SPL. Now we have a board >> that boots from NAND with SPL and has LIBCOMMON enabled (Simon, I did >> not check the rest of your patchset, why do you need LIBCOMMON on the >> hawkboard at all?) > > LIBCOMMON is now needed as the generic relocation based functions > are part of the libcommon.o, which are being enabled in the same > patchset for all arm boards. So if i understand correct, all arm > board based spl's now need libcommon and libgeneric. > > The only thing i see is that libcommon and libgeneric are not > defined for cam_enc_4xx board which uses spl, and this patchset does > not add it either. Not sure whether it got missed. When I asked Heiko Schocher a few month ago why he defined putc and puts in arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c he replied that he could not use LIBCOMMON due to size limitations for the SPL. So I guess that this board will not be able to use the generic relocation functions, unless the SPL is smaller than 16kB, right? Simon's patchset will break this board then, right? However, I we can make all davinci boards use LIBCOMMON, we can remove the putc/puts functions from spl.c. >> However, the patch fixes the warning, but now we use putc and puts >> from LIBCOMMON without initializing them. Thus it breaks the console >> output of the hawkboard SPL. >> >> So the correct solution would be to keep the ifdefs around the >> definition of gdata and bdata as they are, but change board_init_f() >> like this: > > I have a patch for this, which i will send today. There is only one > question i have though. > >> >> void board_init_r(gd_t *id, ulong dummy) >> { >> #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT >> mem_malloc_init(CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE - CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_LEN, >> CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_LEN); > > Can you please explain why we need the mem_malloc_init. I did not > include this, and spl boots up just fine on my board. > malloc is required for the SPI code only, so you could also put it within #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD Regards, Christian
hi Christian, On Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 12:37:16PM +0100, Christian Riesch wrote: > Hi Sughosh, > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh@gmail.com> wrote: > > hi Christian, > > > > On Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 11:39:42AM +0100, Christian Riesch wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > >> >> >> arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c | 2 ++ > >> >> >> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >> >> >> > >> >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c > >> >> >> index b1eff26..2861907 100644 > >> >> >> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c > >> >> >> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c > >> >> >> @@ -32,10 +32,12 @@ > >> >> >> > >> >> >> #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT > >> >> >> > >> >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD > >> >> >> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; > >> >> >> /* Define global data structure pointer to it*/ > >> >> >> static gd_t gdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); > >> >> >> static bd_t bdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); > >> >> >> +#endif > > > > <snip> > > > >> >> > Can you specify which boards you get this warning for. With your > >> >> > patch to add libcommon to hawkboard's spl image, this is now also > >> >> > needed for hawkboard which uses CONFIG_SPL_NAND_LOAD. > >> > >> Simon's patch is for the hawkboard, since due to another patch in his > >> patchset LIBCOMMON is enabled in hawkboard's SPL. Now we have a board > >> that boots from NAND with SPL and has LIBCOMMON enabled (Simon, I did > >> not check the rest of your patchset, why do you need LIBCOMMON on the > >> hawkboard at all?) > > > > LIBCOMMON is now needed as the generic relocation based functions > > are part of the libcommon.o, which are being enabled in the same > > patchset for all arm boards. So if i understand correct, all arm > > board based spl's now need libcommon and libgeneric. > > > > The only thing i see is that libcommon and libgeneric are not > > defined for cam_enc_4xx board which uses spl, and this patchset does > > not add it either. Not sure whether it got missed. > > When I asked Heiko Schocher a few month ago why he defined putc and > puts in arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c he replied that he could > not use LIBCOMMON due to size limitations for the SPL. So I guess that > this board will not be able to use the generic relocation functions, > unless the SPL is smaller than 16kB, right? Simon's patchset will > break this board then, right? That is exactly what i reported in one of the threads in response to addition of libcommon and libgeneric to the hawkboard's spl. In fact, this might cause problems on quite a few boards with spl size restrictions. I am not sure, whether the generic relocation feature should be turned on by default on all boards or should be a config option -- at least for the spl builds. Another option would be to move it to a place where it is not needed to compile in the entire libcommon/libgeneric support that is not needed for the generic relocation code. I think that would help us keep the generic relocation without the size bloat that we see right now. http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2012-February/118567.html <snip> > >> void board_init_r(gd_t *id, ulong dummy) > >> { > >> #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT > >> mem_malloc_init(CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE - CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_LEN, > >> CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_LEN); > > > > Can you please explain why we need the mem_malloc_init. I did not > > include this, and spl boots up just fine on my board. > > > > malloc is required for the SPI code only, so you could also put it > within #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD Ok, i will move the common changes to a static function, and call it from both the nand and spi load cases. Or, should i wait till a consensus is drawn on whether to enable this feature for spl images also. In case this is not needed for spl, then we don't need this change. -sughosh
Le 27/02/2012 13:02, Sughosh Ganu a écrit : >> When I asked Heiko Schocher a few month ago why he defined putc and >> puts in arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c he replied that he could >> not use LIBCOMMON due to size limitations for the SPL. So I guess that >> this board will not be able to use the generic relocation functions, >> unless the SPL is smaller than 16kB, right? Simon's patchset will >> break this board then, right? > > That is exactly what i reported in one of the threads in response to > addition of libcommon and libgeneric to the hawkboard's spl. In > fact, this might cause problems on quite a few boards with spl size > restrictions. I am not sure, whether the generic relocation feature > should be turned on by default on all boards or should be a config > option -- at least for the spl builds. Another option would be to > move it to a place where it is not needed to compile in the entire > libcommon/libgeneric support that is not needed for the generic > relocation code. I think that would help us keep the generic > relocation without the size bloat that we see right now. > > http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2012-February/118567.html Sorry for appearing dumb, but can someone explain to me how SPL relates to relocation in the first place? I thought SPL was meant to be a preloader for the full(er) U-boot, small enough to be loaded by some SoCs' ROM code and possibly even to fit in SRAM. Why does it need relocation? And if it does not, how come it is affected by a rework of the relocation feature? I really would like a heads-up on this. Amicalement,
On 02/28/2012 03:55 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > Le 27/02/2012 13:02, Sughosh Ganu a écrit : > >>> When I asked Heiko Schocher a few month ago why he defined putc and >>> puts in arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c he replied that he could >>> not use LIBCOMMON due to size limitations for the SPL. So I guess that >>> this board will not be able to use the generic relocation functions, >>> unless the SPL is smaller than 16kB, right? Simon's patchset will >>> break this board then, right? >> >> That is exactly what i reported in one of the threads in response to >> addition of libcommon and libgeneric to the hawkboard's spl. In >> fact, this might cause problems on quite a few boards with spl size >> restrictions. I am not sure, whether the generic relocation feature >> should be turned on by default on all boards or should be a config >> option -- at least for the spl builds. Another option would be to >> move it to a place where it is not needed to compile in the entire >> libcommon/libgeneric support that is not needed for the generic >> relocation code. I think that would help us keep the generic >> relocation without the size bloat that we see right now. >> >> http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2012-February/118567.html > > Sorry for appearing dumb, but can someone explain to me how SPL relates > to relocation in the first place? I thought SPL was meant to be a > preloader for the full(er) U-boot, small enough to be loaded by some > SoCs' ROM code and possibly even to fit in SRAM. Why does it need > relocation? And if it does not, how come it is affected by a rework of > the relocation feature? I really would like a heads-up on this. SPL may need relocation to vacate a buffer that will be used for further I/O, such as on Freescale PPC (NAND boot execution begins in the NAND controller's SRAM), or possibly to allow the memory map to be transformed to what the final image is going to expect, etc. Even in cases where the SPL text itself doesn't really need to move, you may need some other things that typically happen along with relocation, such as moving the stack to a larger memory after that memory is initialized, zeroing BSS, etc. -Scott
Hi, On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 4:02 AM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh@gmail.com> wrote: > hi Christian, > > On Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 12:37:16PM +0100, Christian Riesch wrote: >> Hi Sughosh, >> >> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh@gmail.com> wrote: >> > hi Christian, >> > >> > On Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 11:39:42AM +0100, Christian Riesch wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > <snip> >> > >> >> >> >> arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c | 2 ++ >> >> >> >> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c >> >> >> >> index b1eff26..2861907 100644 >> >> >> >> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c >> >> >> >> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c >> >> >> >> @@ -32,10 +32,12 @@ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD >> >> >> >> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >> >> >> >> /* Define global data structure pointer to it*/ >> >> >> >> static gd_t gdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); >> >> >> >> static bd_t bdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); >> >> >> >> +#endif >> > >> > <snip> >> > >> >> >> > Can you specify which boards you get this warning for. With your >> >> >> > patch to add libcommon to hawkboard's spl image, this is now also >> >> >> > needed for hawkboard which uses CONFIG_SPL_NAND_LOAD. >> >> >> >> Simon's patch is for the hawkboard, since due to another patch in his >> >> patchset LIBCOMMON is enabled in hawkboard's SPL. Now we have a board >> >> that boots from NAND with SPL and has LIBCOMMON enabled (Simon, I did >> >> not check the rest of your patchset, why do you need LIBCOMMON on the >> >> hawkboard at all?) >> > >> > LIBCOMMON is now needed as the generic relocation based functions >> > are part of the libcommon.o, which are being enabled in the same >> > patchset for all arm boards. So if i understand correct, all arm >> > board based spl's now need libcommon and libgeneric. >> > >> > The only thing i see is that libcommon and libgeneric are not >> > defined for cam_enc_4xx board which uses spl, and this patchset does >> > not add it either. Not sure whether it got missed. >> >> When I asked Heiko Schocher a few month ago why he defined putc and >> puts in arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c he replied that he could >> not use LIBCOMMON due to size limitations for the SPL. So I guess that >> this board will not be able to use the generic relocation functions, >> unless the SPL is smaller than 16kB, right? Simon's patchset will >> break this board then, right? If it pushes it over 16KB, although it's not clear that it will. So far I haven't seen this and I would hope that builds would fail in this case (normally I got a 'cannot move program counter backwards' error). But clearly putting this code in spl.c is a bit ugly because it hard-codes the driver and duplicates code in common/console.c: void putc(char c) { if (c == '\n') NS16550_putc((NS16550_t)(CONFIG_SYS_NS16550_COM1), '\r'); NS16550_putc((NS16550_t)(CONFIG_SYS_NS16550_COM1), c); } Can someone please check what is the maximum SPL size on one of these boards? Generic relocation increases the spl from 5.9KB to 10KB. Is there an 8KB limit? One option if this really is a problem is to move common/reloc.c to lib/reloc.c, although there isn't really a huge amount of justification for that given that it is U-Boot code. Perhaps we could claim that it is a relocation library and not U-Boot-specific? > > That is exactly what i reported in one of the threads in response to > addition of libcommon and libgeneric to the hawkboard's spl. In > fact, this might cause problems on quite a few boards with spl size > restrictions. I am not sure, whether the generic relocation feature > should be turned on by default on all boards or should be a config > option -- at least for the spl builds. Another option would be to > move it to a place where it is not needed to compile in the entire > libcommon/libgeneric support that is not needed for the generic > relocation code. I think that would help us keep the generic > relocation without the size bloat that we see right now. > > http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2012-February/118567.html Well it would be nice to find out what the limit is. I might be able to squeeze it a bit more even in common. But failing that the putc() hack and lib/ might be the most expedient solution at this stage. > > <snip> > >> >> void board_init_r(gd_t *id, ulong dummy) >> >> { >> >> #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT >> >> mem_malloc_init(CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE - CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_LEN, >> >> CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_LEN); >> > >> > Can you please explain why we need the mem_malloc_init. I did not >> > include this, and spl boots up just fine on my board. >> > >> >> malloc is required for the SPI code only, so you could also put it >> within #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD > > Ok, i will move the common changes to a static function, and call > it from both the nand and spi load cases. Or, should i wait till a > consensus is drawn on whether to enable this feature for spl images > also. In case this is not needed for spl, then we don't need this > change. My series removes the old relocation code, so it really does need to work for SPL also. I have put a bit of effort in here to tidy this up and I don't think it is hard to resolve this last problem. I will investigate this a bit more and then suggest a solution. Regards, Simon > > -sughosh
Hi, On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 4:02 AM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh@gmail.com> wrote: >> hi Christian, >> >> On Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 12:37:16PM +0100, Christian Riesch wrote: >>> Hi Sughosh, >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > hi Christian, >>> > >>> > On Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 11:39:42AM +0100, Christian Riesch wrote: >>> >> Hi, >>> >> >>> >> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>> > <snip> >>> > >>> >> >> >> arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c | 2 ++ >>> >> >> >> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c >>> >> >> >> index b1eff26..2861907 100644 >>> >> >> >> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c >>> >> >> >> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c >>> >> >> >> @@ -32,10 +32,12 @@ >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD >>> >> >> >> DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; >>> >> >> >> /* Define global data structure pointer to it*/ >>> >> >> >> static gd_t gdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); >>> >> >> >> static bd_t bdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); >>> >> >> >> +#endif >>> > >>> > <snip> >>> > >>> >> >> > Can you specify which boards you get this warning for. With your >>> >> >> > patch to add libcommon to hawkboard's spl image, this is now also >>> >> >> > needed for hawkboard which uses CONFIG_SPL_NAND_LOAD. >>> >> >>> >> Simon's patch is for the hawkboard, since due to another patch in his >>> >> patchset LIBCOMMON is enabled in hawkboard's SPL. Now we have a board >>> >> that boots from NAND with SPL and has LIBCOMMON enabled (Simon, I did >>> >> not check the rest of your patchset, why do you need LIBCOMMON on the >>> >> hawkboard at all?) >>> > >>> > LIBCOMMON is now needed as the generic relocation based functions >>> > are part of the libcommon.o, which are being enabled in the same >>> > patchset for all arm boards. So if i understand correct, all arm >>> > board based spl's now need libcommon and libgeneric. >>> > >>> > The only thing i see is that libcommon and libgeneric are not >>> > defined for cam_enc_4xx board which uses spl, and this patchset does >>> > not add it either. Not sure whether it got missed. >>> >>> When I asked Heiko Schocher a few month ago why he defined putc and >>> puts in arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c he replied that he could >>> not use LIBCOMMON due to size limitations for the SPL. So I guess that >>> this board will not be able to use the generic relocation functions, >>> unless the SPL is smaller than 16kB, right? Simon's patchset will >>> break this board then, right? > > If it pushes it over 16KB, although it's not clear that it will. So > far I haven't seen this and I would hope that builds would fail in > this case (normally I got a 'cannot move program counter backwards' > error). > > But clearly putting this code in spl.c is a bit ugly because it > hard-codes the driver and duplicates code in common/console.c: > > void putc(char c) > { > if (c == '\n') > NS16550_putc((NS16550_t)(CONFIG_SYS_NS16550_COM1), '\r'); > > NS16550_putc((NS16550_t)(CONFIG_SYS_NS16550_COM1), c); > } > > Can someone please check what is the maximum SPL size on one of these > boards? Generic relocation increases the spl from 5.9KB to 10KB. Is > there an 8KB limit? > > One option if this really is a problem is to move common/reloc.c to > lib/reloc.c, although there isn't really a huge amount of > justification for that given that it is U-Boot code. Perhaps we could > claim that it is a relocation library and not U-Boot-specific? > >> >> That is exactly what i reported in one of the threads in response to >> addition of libcommon and libgeneric to the hawkboard's spl. In >> fact, this might cause problems on quite a few boards with spl size >> restrictions. I am not sure, whether the generic relocation feature >> should be turned on by default on all boards or should be a config >> option -- at least for the spl builds. Another option would be to >> move it to a place where it is not needed to compile in the entire >> libcommon/libgeneric support that is not needed for the generic >> relocation code. I think that would help us keep the generic >> relocation without the size bloat that we see right now. >> >> http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2012-February/118567.html > > Well it would be nice to find out what the limit is. I might be able > to squeeze it a bit more even in common. But failing that the putc() > hack and lib/ might be the most expedient solution at this stage. > >> >> <snip> >> >>> >> void board_init_r(gd_t *id, ulong dummy) >>> >> { >>> >> #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT >>> >> mem_malloc_init(CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE - CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_LEN, >>> >> CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_LEN); >>> > >>> > Can you please explain why we need the mem_malloc_init. I did not >>> > include this, and spl boots up just fine on my board. >>> > >>> >>> malloc is required for the SPI code only, so you could also put it >>> within #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD >> >> Ok, i will move the common changes to a static function, and call >> it from both the nand and spi load cases. Or, should i wait till a >> consensus is drawn on whether to enable this feature for spl images >> also. In case this is not needed for spl, then we don't need this >> change. > > My series removes the old relocation code, so it really does need to > work for SPL also. I have put a bit of effort in here to tidy this up > and I don't think it is hard to resolve this last problem. > > I will investigate this a bit more and then suggest a solution. Actually further to this it seems that it is just that raise() is calling printf(). Seems like we can punt this unless anyone has objections. Alternatively we could use puts() and just print a general message. I will send a patch. Regards, Simon > > Regards, > Simon > >> >> -sughosh
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c index b1eff26..2861907 100644 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c @@ -32,10 +32,12 @@ #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT +#ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SPI_LOAD DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR; /* Define global data structure pointer to it*/ static gd_t gdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); static bd_t bdata __attribute__ ((section(".data"))); +#endif #else
This fixes the following warnings in an SPL build when libcommon is in use: spl.c:37: warning: 'gdata' defined but not used spl.c:38: warning: 'bdata' defined but not used Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> --- Changes in v4: - Add new patch to fix davinci build warnings arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/spl.c | 2 ++ 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)