On 12/11/2009, Stefan Reinauer <ste...@coresystems.de> wrote: > Myles Watson wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:57 PM, Maciej Pijanka >> <maciej.pija...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On 12/11/2009, Myles Watson <myle...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>> This doesn't seem like it should be a config option any more. >>>>>> >>>>> Ideally, it will become some automatic "as small as possible" >>>>> configuration. >>>>> Unfortunately ld doesn't allow to align everything to an upper >>>>> boundary, >>>>> so >>>>> this requires the link-twice trick or so. >>>>> So for now, I'd like to keep it there - people might want to tweak it. >>>>> As >>>>> an >>>>> example (which made me look into this in the first place), someone >>>>> (agaran) >>>>> on #coreboot wanted to use a smaller bootblock. Until this >>>>> automatically >>>>> happens, we'll have to allow this to change. >>>>> >>>> Sounds good. >>>> >>> For me, ROMBASE must be at 0xFFFE000, that is 4G - romchip size (128k). >>> if i try to set it to anything else i get some errors while build like: >>> >> It broke for me too. I'm getting a 4GB bootblock. I should have >> build/boot tested it. > > Are you guys using the util/crossgcc compiler?
negative, before this change it was working with compiler i use, after change and changing ROMBASE to 4G-128k, works again, if i add crude ld hack i posted previously, i even can make bootblock more tight. best regards Maciej -- Maciej Pijanka, PLD-Linux Developer, Reg Linux user #133161 POE/Perl user -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
