Hello!
I'm having problem with my U-Boot for a PowerPC system. I think the root cause
is that the function get_effective_memsize() (in file arch/powerpc/lib/board.c)
returns 0.
ulong get_effective_memsize(void)
{
#ifndef CONFIG_VERY_BIG_RAM
return gd->ram_size;
#else
/* limit st
On Sep 19, 2012, at 10:28 AM, Robert Thorhuus wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I'm having problem with my U-Boot for a PowerPC system. I think the root
> cause is that the function get_effective_memsize() (in file
> arch/powerpc/lib/board.c) returns 0.
>
> ulong get_effective_memsize(void)
> {
> #ifndef
> -Original Message-
> From: Kumar Gala [mailto:ga...@kernel.crashing.org]
> Sent: den 20 september 2012 19:27
> To: Robert Thorhuus
> Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de
> Subject: Re: [U-Boot]
> arch/powerpc/lib/board.c:get_effective_memsize() for 4GB+ systems
>
>
>
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Robert Thorhuus
wrote:
> I'm using 64 bit mpc85xx cores.
U-Boot runs in 32-bit mode even on a 64-bit code.
> Mapping the whole memory from the beginning was of course just an initial
> thought.
> But for me it looks like the code is just not able to deal with m
> -Original Message-
> From: Tabi Timur-B04825 [mailto:b04...@freescale.com]
> Sent: den 21 september 2012 00:38
> To: Robert Thorhuus
> Cc: Kumar Gala; u-boot@lists.denx.de
> Subject: Re: [U-Boot]
> arch/powerpc/lib/board.c:get_effective_memsize() for 4GB+ system
Robert Thorhuus wrote:
> I really see the advantage of keeping this map you have. It is of
> course more compatible with different OSEs and you do not need to do
> anything special with 32/64 bit cores. But at the same time you never
> take advantage of a 64 bit core with this approach.
U-Boot is
> -Original Message-
> From: Tabi Timur-B04825 [mailto:b04...@freescale.com]
> Sent: den 21 september 2012 13:37
> To: Robert Thorhuus
> Cc: Kumar Gala; u-boot@lists.denx.de
> Subject: Re: [U-Boot]
> arch/powerpc/lib/board.c:get_effective_memsize() for 4GB+ systems
On Sep 21, 2012, at 6:54 AM, Robert Thorhuus wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Tabi Timur-B04825 [mailto:b04...@freescale.com]
>> Sent: den 21 september 2012 13:37
>> To: Robert Thorhuus
>> Cc: Kumar Gala; u-boot@lists.denx.de
>> Subjec
> -Original Message-
> From: Kumar Gala [mailto:ga...@kernel.crashing.org]
> Sent: den 21 september 2012 14:50
> To: Robert Thorhuus
> Cc: 'Tabi Timur-B04825'; u-boot@lists.denx.de
> Subject: Re: [U-Boot]
> arch/powerpc/lib/board.c:get_effective_memsize()
Robert Thorhuus wrote:
> No I will not be using much memory at all for functionality. But the
> memory needs to be tested. What is your proposal for that then?
We have that already. Look at CONFIG_SYS_POST_MEMORY. It uses sliding
2GB TLBs to test all of DDR.
> And I see U-Boot as the first soft
Robert Thorhuus wrote:
> Still I wonder why the choice was made to have U-Boot relocate in high
> memory rather than low memory and also not making it easy to configure
> the relocation.
U-Boot relocates in high memory so that you can load your operating system
at address 0.
--
Timur Tabi
Linux
> -Original Message-
> From: Timur Tabi [mailto:ti...@freescale.com]
> Sent: den 21 september 2012 15:30
> To: Robert Thorhuus
> Cc: 'Kumar Gala'; u-boot@lists.denx.de
> Subject: Re: [U-Boot]
> arch/powerpc/lib/board.c:get_effective_memsize() for 4GB+ sys
> -Original Message-
> From: Timur Tabi [mailto:ti...@freescale.com]
> Sent: den 21 september 2012 15:29
> To: Robert Thorhuus
> Cc: Kumar Gala; u-boot@lists.denx.de
> Subject: Re: [U-Boot]
> arch/powerpc/lib/board.c:get_effective_memsize() for 4GB+ systems
>
Robert Thorhuus wrote:
> Sorry. But this is were I disagree with you. Of course its prime
> function is to boot an operating system. And usually in a desktop
> environment that is what you need. But if you have newly developed
> hardware it is very seldom everything works all the time. There are a
14 matches
Mail list logo
