The reverted change linked to some kernel documentation that requires 64- bit alignment. I agree with the alignment requirement.
Im my opinion, there are two things that need to be done:
First is to look at an ALIGNED address for the fdt. A summary inspection of board_fdt_blob_setup() tells us this is done via the "_end" linker symbol.
The linker script can only control padding of the executable, but won't affect the alignment of the fdt that can be appended to this later by mkimage.
Second is to put things in the right place. For FIT, the code, as is, is correct, but this alignment is not guaranteed for legacy images. I think somebody mentioned changing the arguments to mkimage to achieve this.
I've tried to fix the first point by aligning the _end symbol (appendix A). Unfortunately, this is causing other build issues that I don't know how to deal with.
Alex
APPENDIX A:
-- a/arch/arm/cpu/u-boot.lds +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/u-boot.lds @@ -196,7 +196,6 @@ SECTIONS * for FIT images. * See common/spl/spl_fit.c: spl_fit_append_fdt */
. = ALIGN(8); .end : { *(.__end)