Scott Wood <scottw...@freescale.com> wrote on 2010/11/23 23:32:04: > > On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 23:14:06 +0100 > Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernl...@transmode.se> wrote: > > > Scott Wood <scottw...@freescale.com> wrote on 2010/11/23 22:20:58: > > > "load address" being pre-relocation? Currently these must be equal > > > (which doesn't seem particularly burdensome). > > > > Yes, but in our case we update the boot in the field and we want to > > make that safer by having two uboot areas but we don't want to carry around > > two u-boot images. > > How about playing with BATs before entering C code, so that the image > always appears at the same effective address?
hmm, never thought of that. The extra bonus would be that LINK_OFF should not be needed either. Jocke _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
