Re: [PATCH] spl: Jump to image at end of board_init_r

29 Sep 2023

On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 07:56:49AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
...
On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 02:57:42AM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
...
On 9/27/23 23:44, Jonas Karlman wrote:
...
spl_board_prepare_for_boot() is not called before jumping/invoking atf,
optee, opensbi or linux images.
Jump to image at the end of board_init_r() to fix this.
Signed-off-by: Jonas Karlman jonas@kwiboo.se
This patch have dependencies on the following patches:
spl: add __noreturn attribute to spl_invoke_opensbi function
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1827057/
spl: add __noreturn attribute to spl_invoke_atf function
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1831366/
spl: Drop the switch() statement for OS selection
from the "spl: Preparation for Universal Payload" series
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1839731/

common/spl/spl.c | 12 +++++++-----
  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/common/spl/spl.c b/common/spl/spl.c
index f7608f14e365..79c39820262a 100644
--- a/common/spl/spl.c
+++ b/common/spl/spl.c
@@ -647,6 +647,8 @@ void board_init_r(gd_t *dummy1, ulong dummy2)
   	BOOT_DEVICE_NONE,
   	BOOT_DEVICE_NONE,
   };

typedef void __noreturn (*jump_to_image_t)(struct spl_image_info *);
jump_to_image_t jump_to_image = &jump_to_image_no_args;
struct spl_image_info spl_image;
int ret, os;

@@ -735,20 +737,20 @@ void board_init_r(gd_t *dummy1, ulong dummy2)
   } else if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(ATF) && os == IH_OS_ARM_TRUSTED_FIRMWARE) {
   	debug("Jumping to U-Boot via ARM Trusted Firmware\n");
   	spl_fixup_fdt(spl_image_fdt_addr(&spl_image));

spl_invoke_atf(&spl_image);




jump_to_image = &spl_invoke_atf;

} else if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OPTEE_IMAGE) && os == IH_OS_TEE) {
debug("Jumping to U-Boot via OP-TEE\n");
spl_board_prepare_for_optee(spl_image_fdt_addr(&spl_image));


jump_to_image_optee(&spl_image);




jump_to_image = &jump_to_image_optee;

} else if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OPENSBI) && os == IH_OS_OPENSBI) {
debug("Jumping to U-Boot via RISC-V OpenSBI\n");


spl_invoke_opensbi(&spl_image);




jump_to_image = &spl_invoke_opensbi;

} else if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OS_BOOT) && os == IH_OS_LINUX) {
debug("Jumping to Linux\n");
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SPL_OS_BOOT))
	spl_fixup_fdt((void *)SPL_PAYLOAD_ARGS_ADDR);
spl_board_prepare_for_linux();


jump_to_image_linux(&spl_image);




jump_to_image = &jump_to_image_linux;

} else {
debug("Unsupported OS image.. Jumping nevertheless..\n");
}

@@ -788,7 +790,7 @@ void board_init_r(gd_t *dummy1, ulong dummy2)
   }
spl_board_prepare_for_boot();

jump_to_image_no_args(&spl_image);


jump_to_image(&spl_image);
}
/*


In SPL we are fighting for every byte of binary size.
What is the impact of this change on the code size?
I would expect that your increasing it; especially if only one of the
CONFIG_OPTIONS is enabled.
If so, NAK to this patch despite all elegance.
We aren't _that_ strict, no.  And a very quick peek shows that this
seems fine overall.  Since you raised the question I'll do a quick
world build but socfpga_agilex_vab (as a config I had size change
results for in front of me for something else) shrank by 4 bytes with
just the prerequsites and this patch applied.
Yes, this generally is a small shrink or a small growth and fine.
-- 
Tom

    