Re: [PATCH v3 08/11] configs: am62lx_evm: add initial defconfig
Bryan Brattlof <[email protected]> Tue, 4 Aug 2026 14:10:05 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On August 4, 2026 thus sayeth Anshul Dalal: > On Tue Aug 4, 2026 at 5:39 AM IST, Bryan Brattlof wrote: > > Add the initial minimum configuration needed to boot the AM62L3-SK > > reference boards. > > > > Tested-by: Anshul Dalal <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Bryan Brattlof <[email protected]> > > --- > > Changes in v2: > > - removed options used for fit image signing > > - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] > > --- > > configs/am62lx_evm_defconfig | 139 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 139 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/configs/am62lx_evm_defconfig b/configs/am62lx_evm_defconfig > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..2db07b508c2a > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/configs/am62lx_evm_defconfig > > @@ -0,0 +1,139 @@ > > +CONFIG_ARM=y > > +CONFIG_ARCH_K3=y > > +CONFIG_TEXT_BASE=0x84000000 > > +CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_F_LEN=0x8000 > > +CONFIG_TI_COMMON_CMD_OPTIONS=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_GPIO=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT=y > > +CONFIG_SOC_K3_AM62L3=y > > +CONFIG_TARGET_AM62L3_EVM=y > > +CONFIG_HAS_CUSTOM_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR=y > > +CONFIG_CUSTOM_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR=0x82b80000 > > +CONFIG_SF_DEFAULT_SPEED=25000000 > > +CONFIG_DM_GPIO=y > > +CONFIG_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE="ti/k3-am62l3-evm" > > +CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT_OVERLAY=y > > +CONFIG_DM_RESET=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_MMC=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_SERIAL=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R_ADDR=0x85000000 > > +CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE=0x82000000 > > +CONFIG_SPL_HAS_BSS_LINKER_SECTION=y > > +CONFIG_SPL_BSS_START_ADDR=0x82c80000 > > +CONFIG_SPL_BSS_MAX_SIZE=0x80000 > > +CONFIG_SPL_STACK_R=y > > +CONFIG_SYS_BOOTM_LEN=0x800000 > > Currently using the command 'spl export' throws a "Image too large: > increase CONFIG_SYS_BOOTM_LEN" warning. Steps to reproduce: > > => load mmc 1:2 $loadaddr boot/fitImage > => spl export fdt $loadaddr > > Is there any reason we are keeping it this low? I think the default of > 0x8000000 should be fine for us. Sure I can drop this. ~Bryan