* [PATCH] fixup! ARM: i.MX8M: implement bootrom log viewing command
@ 2022-12-06 11:58 Ahmad Fatoum
2022-12-07 7:03 ` Sascha Hauer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Ahmad Fatoum @ 2022-12-06 11:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: barebox; +Cc: Ahmad Fatoum
FAIL is reported even for non-HAB boot, so skip that.
0x82 is apparently documented wrongly in application note, see:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20220414163623.16500-1-fedor.ross@ifm.com/
Signed-off-by: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
---
arch/arm/mach-imx/bootrom-cmd.c | 7 ++++---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/bootrom-cmd.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/bootrom-cmd.c
index 6269f86cbc0d..0238d09b169f 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/bootrom-cmd.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/bootrom-cmd.c
@@ -117,7 +117,8 @@ static int imx8m_bootrom_decode_log(const u32 *rom_log)
rom_log[++i]);
continue;
case 0x82:
- printf("Start to execute boot device driver pre-config\n");
+ printf("Start to execute boot device driver pre-config @%u ticks\n",
+ rom_log[++i]);
continue;
case 0x83:
printf("Boot device driver pre-config completes\n");
@@ -144,8 +145,8 @@ static int imx8m_bootrom_decode_log(const u32 *rom_log)
continue;
case 0xa0:
- printf("Image authentication result: %s (0x%08x) @%u ticks\n",
- (rom_log[i+1] & 0xFF) == 0xF0 ? "PASS" : "FAIL",
+ printf("Image authentication result: %s(0x%08x) @%u ticks\n",
+ (rom_log[i+1] & 0xFF) == 0xF0 ? "PASS " : "",
rom_log[i+1], rom_log[i+2]);
i += 2;
continue;
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] fixup! ARM: i.MX8M: implement bootrom log viewing command
2022-12-06 11:58 [PATCH] fixup! ARM: i.MX8M: implement bootrom log viewing command Ahmad Fatoum
@ 2022-12-07 7:03 ` Sascha Hauer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Sascha Hauer @ 2022-12-07 7:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ahmad Fatoum; +Cc: barebox
On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 12:58:39PM +0100, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> FAIL is reported even for non-HAB boot, so skip that.
> 0x82 is apparently documented wrongly in application note, see:
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20220414163623.16500-1-fedor.ross@ifm.com/
>
> Signed-off-by: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
> ---
> arch/arm/mach-imx/bootrom-cmd.c | 7 ++++---
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Applied, thanks
Sascha
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/bootrom-cmd.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/bootrom-cmd.c
> index 6269f86cbc0d..0238d09b169f 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/bootrom-cmd.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/bootrom-cmd.c
> @@ -117,7 +117,8 @@ static int imx8m_bootrom_decode_log(const u32 *rom_log)
> rom_log[++i]);
> continue;
> case 0x82:
> - printf("Start to execute boot device driver pre-config\n");
> + printf("Start to execute boot device driver pre-config @%u ticks\n",
> + rom_log[++i]);
> continue;
> case 0x83:
> printf("Boot device driver pre-config completes\n");
> @@ -144,8 +145,8 @@ static int imx8m_bootrom_decode_log(const u32 *rom_log)
> continue;
>
> case 0xa0:
> - printf("Image authentication result: %s (0x%08x) @%u ticks\n",
> - (rom_log[i+1] & 0xFF) == 0xF0 ? "PASS" : "FAIL",
> + printf("Image authentication result: %s(0x%08x) @%u ticks\n",
> + (rom_log[i+1] & 0xFF) == 0xF0 ? "PASS " : "",
> rom_log[i+1], rom_log[i+2]);
> i += 2;
> continue;
> --
> 2.30.2
>
>
>
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-12-07 7:04 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-12-06 11:58 [PATCH] fixup! ARM: i.MX8M: implement bootrom log viewing command Ahmad Fatoum
2022-12-07 7:03 ` Sascha Hauer
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox