On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:01:12PM +0800, Bin Meng wrote:
Hi Tom,
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 10:46 PM Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 10:50:48PM +0800, Bin Meng wrote:
Hi Tom,
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 9:37 PM Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 09:37:28AM +0800, Bin Meng wrote:
Hi Tom,
On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 8:37 PM Bin Meng bmeng.cn@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 3:22 PM Masahiro Yamada masahiroy@kernel.org wrote: > > Currently generic-asm-offsets.h and asm-offsets.h are generated based > on U-Boot proper config options. The same asm-offsets headers are used > for building U-Boot SPL/TPL, which causes potential offset mismatch if > U-Boot proper has different config options from U-Boot SPL/TPL. > > This commit adds: > spl/include/generated/(generic-)asm-offsets.h > tpl/include/generated/(generic-)asm-offsets.h > > spl/include/generated/(generic-)asm-offsets.h is generated if > CONFIG_SPL=y, and included when building SPL. > > tpl/include/generated/(generic-)asm-offsets.h is generated if > CONFIG_TPL=y, and included when building TPL. > > They are created before Kbuild descends into SPL/TPL object directories > and builds $(obj)/dts/dt-platdata.o because $(obj)/dts/dt-platdata.c > includes a bunch of headers. > > Prepend -I$(obj)/include to $(UBOOTINCLUDE) so (generic-)asm-offsets.h > is searched in {spl,tpl}/include/generated/. > > Requested-by: Bin Meng bmeng.cn@gmail.com > Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada masahiroy@kernel.org > --- > > Changes in v2: None > > Kbuild | 4 ++-- > scripts/Makefile.spl | 10 ++++++++-- > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >
It works like a charm. Thanks!
Tested-by: Bin Meng bmeng.cn@gmail.com
It looks only patch 1 and 2 in this series were applied. This patch was missed.
So, I was going to ask and forgot, sorry. Why do we need to have these differ between TPL/SPL/U-Boot itself, and then why is that good? I
Because currently the offsets {spl,tpl}/include/generated/(generic-)asm-offsets.h are generated per the U-Boot config options. But SPL and TPL are not guaranteed to have the same config options.
For example it's possible to have SPL/TPL turned on {SPL,TPL}_CONFIG_XXX but U-Boot to turn off CONFIG_XXX, or vice verse.
To me this is more like a bug fix other than a feature.
Ah, OK. But shouldn't we make sure that asm-offsets are consistent between SPL/TPL/U-Boot? Or is there a use-case where it makes sense for them to differ intentionally?
I don't know other boards, but for now RISC-V does turn on SPL_SMP in SPL, but does not turn on SMP in U-Boot S-mode. U-Boot M-mode can still turn on SMP.
OK. I'd really like to have it confirmed that it's a good idea to have that value differ between the modes and it's not a bug that should be fixed. Thanks!