From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Aneesh V Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 09:59:39 +0530 Subject: [U-Boot] SPL framework re-design In-Reply-To: References: <4DF9B9E0.8020206@ti.com> <20110616104716.762DD19E5AC3@gemini.denx.de> <4DFA00B8.7000807@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4E080733.2030001@ti.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi Ilya, On Monday 27 June 2011 04:47 AM, Ilya Yanok wrote: > Hello everybody, > > I've read the whole thread and I really like what Daniel suggests but I just > want to speak it in a little bit different words. > > I wonder why do we need this whole spl thing in the first place (well, > surely I know what they are used for but why do we need a separate entity > for this)? Isn't it just the same U-Boot in, well, very special configuration > (minimal set of drivers, no shell, etc)? Why do we need a whole shadow tree > at spl/ instead of just providing the _configuration_? > > Am I missing something? The reason is that the regular U-Boot is not configurable enough to build the extremely small images that should fit in internal RAM. The last time I attempted, I ended up getting an ~60KB image for OMAP4(that too without any of the hardware initialization I am adding in my SPL work). > > Aneesh, what's the state of your patches? I'm especially interrested in > OMAP3 (AM3517) support. Maybe I will be able to help you. I should be able to send out an updated revision of my series once we finalize on the new framework for SPL. BTW, John Rigby had sent out a series sometime back for OMAP3 NAND SPL. That can be integrated with my work and we will get an SPL that supports both MMC and NAND. I guess Simon Schwarz is also doing some work lately on OMAP3. best regards, Aneesh