Looks like SPL_SEPARATE_BSS is special.
Guess, I’ll need to figure out how to best deal with that one (or fall back to defining it via defconfig until we can enable TPL/SPL for all RK3368 board). I wonder how an implies would behave here...
On 02 Aug 2017, at 14:47, Andy Yan andyshrk@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Philipp:
2017-07-29 3:22 GMT+08:00 Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com mailto:philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com>: With SPL and TPL support for the RK3368 in place, mark SPL and TPL as supported from Kconfig for the RK3368. As this is primarily tested on the RK3368-uQ7, we'll leave it to board's individual defconfig to enable.
Also enable DEBUG_UART_BOARD_INIT for the RK3368, so we get output during the early boot-up, as we turn on TPL and SPL.
Signed-off-by: Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com mailto:philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com>
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org mailto:sjg@chromium.org>
Changes in v3: None Changes in v2: None
arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig | 7 +++++++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig index 8a89b51..8406e33 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/Kconfig @@ -67,6 +67,13 @@ config ROCKCHIP_RK3328 config ROCKCHIP_RK3368 bool "Support Rockchip RK3368" select ARM64
select SUPPORT_SPLselect SUPPORT_TPLselect SPL_SEPARATE_BSSselect SPL_SERIAL_SUPPORTselect TPL_SERIAL_SUPPORTThese should depends on TPL/SPL, or we will get compile warnings like bellow on non-SPL/TPL boards(px5 evb): (ROCKCHIP_RK3368 && ROCKCHIP_RK3399 && X86_RUN_64BIT) selects SPL_SEPARATE_BSS which has unmet direct dependencies (SPL)
select ENABLE_ARM_SOC_BOOT0_HOOKselect DEBUG_UART_BOARD_INIT select SYS_NS16550 help The Rockchip RK3368 is a ARM-based SoC with a octa-core (organised-- 2.1.4
U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de mailto:U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot