On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 08:31:46PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
Sorry for the delay, Scott.
> Mark A. Greer wrote:
> >Why? Because its only safe to download a zImage to certain "safe"
> >locations.
> >Where those "safe" locations are vary by firmware, firmware version, and
> >zImage size. This is
Mark A. Greer wrote:
> Why? Because its only safe to download a zImage to certain "safe" locations.
> Where those "safe" locations are vary by firmware, firmware version, and
> zImage size. This is the issue we're discussing.
In theory, yes -- but in practice the odds of this particular heuristi
On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 12:30:54PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 06:58:49PM -0700, Mark A. Greer wrote:
> > Having the link address jump around depending on the size of the kernel
> > or zImage is wrong IMHO. It just screams "weird can't boot issues."
> > We need a way to spec
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 06:58:49PM -0700, Mark A. Greer wrote:
> Having the link address jump around depending on the size of the kernel
> or zImage is wrong IMHO. It just screams "weird can't boot issues."
> We need a way to specify exactly where we want the zImage linked no
> matter what the ker
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 07:59:30PM -0700, Mark A. Greer wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 12:25:54PM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> > The zImage is already hardware and
> > firmware specific;
>
> And [potentially] firmware version and zImage size specific.
I meant to add, "which is why it'll be dif
On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 12:25:54PM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 06:58:49PM -0700, Mark A. Greer wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 03:50:05PM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 06:23:09PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
> > > > David Gibson wrote:
> > >
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 06:58:49PM -0700, Mark A. Greer wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 03:50:05PM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 06:23:09PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
> > > David Gibson wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:36:27PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 03:50:05PM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 06:23:09PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
> > David Gibson wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:36:27PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
> > Looking deeper at this I've found that currently u-boot thinks tha
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 06:23:09PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
> David Gibson wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:36:27PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
> >> Currently zImage is linked at the 4MB base address.
> >> Some platforms (using cuboot, treeboot) need the zImage's
> >> entry point an
David Gibson wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:36:27PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
>> Currently zImage is linked at the 4MB base address.
>> Some platforms (using cuboot, treeboot) need the zImage's
>> entry point and base address. They place zImage exactly
>> at the base address it's been li
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:36:27PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
> Currently zImage is linked at the 4MB base address.
> Some platforms (using cuboot, treeboot) need the zImage's
> entry point and base address. They place zImage exactly
> at the base address it's been linked to. Sometimes 4MB lef
Currently zImage is linked at the 4MB base address.
Some platforms (using cuboot, treeboot) need the zImage's
entry point and base address. They place zImage exactly
at the base address it's been linked to. Sometimes 4MB left
at the start of the memory is simply not enough to unpack zImage.
This co
12 matches
Mail list logo
