The sections described in the sandbox linker script are inserted before
data section via "INSERT BEFORE .data;". Running readelf -S on sandbox
u-boot binary shows that the bss section is located after the data
section:
Section Headers:
[Nr] Name Type Address Offset
Size EntSize Flags Link Info Align
...
[25] .u_boot_list PROGBITS 000000000041d1c8 0021d1c8
000000000000dd90 0000000000000000 WA 0 0 8
[26] _u_boot_sandbox_g PROGBITS 000000000042af58 0022af58
00000000000000a0 0000000000000000 WA 0 0 8
[27] .data PROGBITS 000000000042b000 0022b000
000000000000f708 0000000000000000 WA 0 0 32
[28] .bss NOBITS 000000000043a720 0023a708
0000000000018930 0000000000000000 WA 0 0 32
This means that the __bss_start assignment in the linker script is bogus,
as the actual bss section start is located elsewhere. Remove this
assignment, as the __bss_start symbol is not used on sandbox anyway.
Signed-off-by: Ovidiu Panait <ovidiu.panait@windriver.com>
In order to be able to update data in u_boot_list, move this section to
make it RW.
Signed-off-by: Walter Lozano <walter.lozano@collabora.com>
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
At present we don't have a test that of-platdata can be accessed in SPL.
Add this in as a command-line option to SPL.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
When U-Boot started using SPDX tags we were among the early adopters and
there weren't a lot of other examples to borrow from. So we picked the
area of the file that usually had a full license text and replaced it
with an appropriate SPDX-License-Identifier: entry. Since then, the
Linux Kernel has adopted SPDX tags and they place it as the very first
line in a file (except where shebangs are used, then it's second line)
and with slightly different comment styles than us.
In part due to community overlap, in part due to better tag visibility
and in part for other minor reasons, switch over to that style.
This commit changes all instances where we have a single declared
license in the tag as both the before and after are identical in tag
contents. There's also a few places where I found we did not have a tag
and have introduced one.
Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
It is useful to be able to build SPL for sandbox. It provides additional
build coverage and allows SPL features to be tested in sandbox. However
it does not need worthwhile to always create an SPL build. It nearly
doubles the build time and the feature is (so far) seldom used.
So for now, create a separate build target for sandbox SPL. This allows
experimentation with this new feature without impacting existing workflows.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
