On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 at 21:49, Soeren Moch smoch@web.de wrote:
On 05.12.23 14:15, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
I think I solved the size issue on all the boards.
Key changes:
- remove compilation of original ping.c and tftp.c (tftp had also server
code, so I will partially bring it back.)
Interesting. @Tom: Is there other server code in u-boot, that is enabled by default (and can be used to reclaim code space)? Fur sure I do not need u-boot to act as server for tftp (maye nfs, others).
Maybe I need to be more clear about this. reference to code from tftp.c and ping.c exist in net.c, test/image/spl_load_net.c, test.dm/dsa.c, test/dm/eth.c. And even if that code is not used (replaced with lwip calls to the same commands in my case) it adds additional size. Even enabled LTO does not see direct difference.
- LTO=y
- CONFIG_LOGLEVEL=3 instead of 4.
- CONFIG_CMD_DATE is not set
- CONFIG_CMD_LICENSE is not set
- CONFIG_CMD_PING (if 1-6 did not help).
And these changes were enough for CI tagrets to build. I also tested that Raspberry PI 4B works fine (dhcp, ping). Looking for other boards to test.
For example for this tbs2910 board changes are:
Disabling CMD_DATE is unfortunate. This can help to debug RTC problems (already used it for this purpose). And, if we are that close to the size limit, than maybe we can get away for this series, but for sure will run into trouble for every other small change to u-boot core/driver code.
Regards, Soeren
The problem is that for many targets the limit is 1MB. U-Boot in some minimal configuration is about 500kb. But U-boot with EFI, USB, Eth drivers, MMC, RTC, and all the commands is 900+ kb and very close to 1MB. Most of the new features are enabled by default. I.e. they do not exist in _defconfig and appear in the resulting .config automatically. I would say that for some small targets things like EFI, Secure boot, TPM, Updates and many others are not needed. But if new features will appear by default very soon we will see limits.
BR, Maxim.
--- a/configs/tbs2910_defconfig +++ b/configs/tbs2910_defconfig @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_END=0x2f400000 CONFIG_LTO=y CONFIG_HAS_BOARD_SIZE_LIMIT=y CONFIG_BOARD_SIZE_LIMIT=392192 +CONFIG_TIMESTAMP=y (this was added by savedefconfig) # CONFIG_BOOTSTD is not set CONFIG_SUPPORT_RAW_INITRD=y CONFIG_BOOTDELAY=3 @@ -26,6 +27,7 @@ CONFIG_BOOTCOMMAND="mmc rescan; if run bootcmd_up1; then run bootcmd_up2; else r CONFIG_USE_PREBOOT=y CONFIG_PREBOOT="echo PCI:; pci enum; pci 1; usb start" CONFIG_DEFAULT_FDT_FILE="imx6q-tbs2910.dtb" +CONFIG_LOGLEVEL=3 CONFIG_PRE_CONSOLE_BUFFER=y CONFIG_HUSH_PARSER=y CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT="Matrix U-Boot> " @@ -52,7 +54,7 @@ CONFIG_CMD_DHCP=y CONFIG_CMD_MII=y CONFIG_CMD_PING=y CONFIG_CMD_CACHE=y -CONFIG_CMD_TIME=y +# CONFIG_CMD_DATE is not set CONFIG_CMD_SYSBOOT=y # CONFIG_CMD_VIDCONSOLE is not set CONFIG_CMD_EXT2=y
BR, Maxim.
On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 at 13:09, Maxim Uvarov maxim.uvarov@linaro.org wrote:
On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 at 03:20, Soeren Moch smoch@web.de wrote:
On 27.11.23 14:11, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 06:57:09PM +0600, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
Increase allowed binary size to fit lwip code.
Signed-off-by: Maxim Uvarov maxim.uvarov@linaro.org
configs/tbs2910_defconfig | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/configs/tbs2910_defconfig b/configs/tbs2910_defconfig index 8fbe84f1d2..ce40efa9ab 100644 --- a/configs/tbs2910_defconfig +++ b/configs/tbs2910_defconfig @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_START=0x10000000 CONFIG_SYS_MEMTEST_END=0x2f400000 CONFIG_LTO=y CONFIG_HAS_BOARD_SIZE_LIMIT=y -CONFIG_BOARD_SIZE_LIMIT=392192 +CONFIG_BOARD_SIZE_LIMIT=417792 # CONFIG_BOOTSTD is not set CONFIG_SUPPORT_RAW_INITRD=y CONFIG_BOOTDELAY=3
This is another case where the binary size is a fairly hard limit. You forgot to cc the board maintainer here (and I assume the rest of the series too) for these config changes.
ThanksTom for sending a notification to me.
Yes, the CONFIG_BOARD_SIZE_LIMIT is a hard limit and this patch in its current form will break tbs2910 support and even brick the board for some configurations. So NAK for this patch.
I think on this platform it's not impossible (like it is on am335x where I just replied) but really difficult. I'll let Soeren comment on if switching the network stack to lwip is the kind of feature enhancement that warrants the pain of dealing with the size change here or not.
Network boot is no important feature for this board and not used in the default boot configuration. But network support always was part of the config, may be used by some users, and is at least required to communicate the ethernet address to linux.
So I'm not interested in a new network stack for this board, but also cannot disable network support completely. This seems to be a problem for this patch series, since networking support implies LWIP now.
Thanks Soeren for the explanation. Then yes, something more advanced is needed to be done here.
The question for me is, why is the new network stack consuming so much space, with only a few enabled commands? Is the whole library linked in with some unused features (the cover letter mentions much more than what seems to be used in the converted commands). Or is the old network stack linked in in parallel to the new one? Can we save space here?
Yes, the old code is still there. I decided to not touch it for the first integration (arp.o, bootp.o, ping.o and mostly all from net/Makefile). Those files also have reference code in net/net.c. Not compiling and not linking this code will save some space, but It's larger than the current version. Like for EVM SPL code with usb+net+ext4 and etc have very minimal space for network stack. I will take a look at this more closely...
NFS support in the old networking code is quite big, enabled by default, and probably still there in parallel to this new lwip library. If there is really no other option to save space, and lwip in general is agreed to be the way forward for U-Boot, and only tbs2910 is blocking that, then from my point of view disabling NFS for tbs2910 could be a way to stay within the size limit.
ok. I think that by default we need something very minimal (dhcp,
tftp), probably ping is even not needed.
Regards, Soeren