>> One way to lift this limitation is to relocate the bootwrapper to >> somewhere else, say for example, 0x1000000 so that a 16MB initramfs >> can be loaded. If the bootwrapper is relocated, what else would be >> affected by this relocation? > > It should be fine to just change it locally. It would be a problem to > change it upstream for all boards, since some supported boards have > only 16MB (or even 8MB) of RAM.
I'll definitely try to change it locally first. Would a configurable base address for the bootwrapper an acceptable solution? > Another option is to provide a vmlinux_alloc callback to stick the > kernel somewhere other than zero, at the cost of an extra image copy > once the kernel runs to get itself back down to zero. This wasn't done > in cuboot because it was considered better to adjust the bootwrapper > link address at build time based on the kernel+ramfs image size, but > that never got implemented. > > Perhaps a reasonable compromise is a vmlinux_alloc that returns zero if > the image fits there, and calls malloc otherwise? I'll look into this too. Thanks, -Shawn. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev