Dear "J. William Campbell", In message <4ca75bfb.5030...@comcast.net> you wrote: > > >>> And I think there are more places of this type in u-boot... > >> Yes, maybe. But relocation as I did for arm, also works > >> on m68k, sparc, mips, avr32 and they must do also this > >> fixups, so for common functions (except the new env handling, > >> which I think got never tested on this architectures?) should > >> work ... > > This pointer problem is solved with the fixup relocs on ppc and > > should work without manual relocation. I think this is a ppc > > only extension but I might be wrong. > > You are correct that this is a ppc only extension. As such, it is > not a good candidate for "general" use.
On contrary. If it works for PPC, then there should be ways to do the same on other architectures. > Using the full relocation scheme eliminates the need for all these > "fixups" in u-boot C code. I think this is a very desirable result. > It is also not clear to me that hard coding in the relocation as several > C routines will produce a u-boot that is "smaller" than the one > produced by using normal ELF relocation. However, using full relocation > creates an environment that is true "C" and does not rely on people > remembering that they may have to fix up some parts of their code. It is > hard to see much downside in using the full relocation capability > provided by Graeme's code. Agreed. But if we take this path, we need to find an implementation that looks clean and readable. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de Overflow on /dev/null, please empty the bit bucket. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot