[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 15/21] Refactor the bootm command to reduce code duplication

From: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 15/21] Refactor the bootm command to reduce code duplication
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 00:57:50 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPnjgZ2rSOYPQ0R_5vepbKZP-0Lg_9UMzH9JZ0CT2VJv804mZA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPnjgZ2oxbsqSr-MCQUOjQZbE89Nb4OJ1FvGNGTBMsRGUDOr6g@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Stefan,

On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 12:12 AM, Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> wrote:

> Hi Stefan,
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 12:04 AM, Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de> wrote:
>
>> On 06/28/2013 08:58 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>> >     One idea: It might have something to do with the interrupt
>> disabling, as
>> >     powerpc compresses to 0. And thats the location of the interrupt
>> vectors
>> >     (timer?). Just an idea. Do you remember shuffling the
>> >     disable_interrupts() call around?
>> >
>> >
>> > Hmmm yes I did shuffle them around, figuring that the interrupts needed
>> > to be disabled before booting the OS but not before loading it. It seems
>> > like I made a bad assumption here.
>>
>> Yes, I already found that one as well. But moving this disable before
>> kernel loading unfortunately doesn't fix this issue completely. gunzip
>> now finished with "... OK". But Linux Kernel booting still does not work.
>>
>
> Well actually that is progress, since now it is similar to Tom's ARM
> platform. I will post the patch soon once buildman finishes.
>
>>
>> > I have been through the code multiple times and I cannot see a
>> > difference in operation. Also it does work correctly on the ARM
>> > platforms I have tried. It is broken on Tom's ARM platform, but perhaps
>> > that could be an interrupt issue also.
>> >
>> > I am going to post a patch to restore the interrupt code to where it
>> > was, hoping that this shows some difference for your error. I will also
>> > post a couple of revert patches for those who are blocked on this. We
>> > will have to apply reverts fairly soon if the solution doesn't present
>> > itself.
>> >
>> >
>> >     I'll check myself in a few hours.
>> >
>> >
>> > OK please let me know if you find anything else. Thanks for your help.
>> > Refactoring code is a tricky business...I much prefer the new bootm
>> > code, if it can work on all platforms.
>>
>> I'm still at it. Will keep you informed. Stay tuned...
>>
>
> Thanks very much!
>

I have sent the interrupt patch and two reverts, all run through buildman.
Please take a look at those also if you have a chance. I will check what
you find in the morning - I am halfway through writing some sandbox tests
for legacy images. Test coverage of bootm seems desirable to me given the
large number of features it supports.

There is still a bug there but so far it eludes me. Hopefully tomorrow I
can repeat it, and then it will be much easier to figure out.

Regards,
Simon