On Wed, 14 May 2008 15:31:43 -0500 Becky Bruce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On May 14, 2008, at 1:57 PM, Kim Phillips wrote: > > On Wed, 14 May 2008 13:10:04 -0500 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >> From: Becky Bruce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > >> Currently, END_OF_RAM is used by the trap code to determine if > >> we should attempt to access the stack pointer or not. However, > >> on systems with a lot of RAM, only a subset of the RAM is > >> guaranteed to be mapped in and accessible. Change END_OF_RAM > >> to use get_effective_memsize() instead of using the raw ram > >> size out of the bd. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Becky Bruce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> --- > > > > what, no love for 4xx, 83xx, and 74xx_7xx? > > The other platforms currently set a hard limit that should still be > valid - I just changed the ones that were reading memsize directly > out of the bd. > sure, 5xx, 82xx and 8xx are hardcoded, but 74xx_7xx (albeit only AMIGAONE), all 83xx, and all 4xx use the bd just like in your current patchseries. I'm just trying to maintain some level of consistency. > > can also be made a single patch for WD to apply directly. > > > > Sure, I just split it up in case there was some reason we shouldn't > do it for one of them. ah, I thought you wanted individual maintainers to pick them up individually. Either way works, really. Kim ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users