Hi Brendan, On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Brendan Conoboy <blc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 03/26/2013 05:04 PM, Graeme Russ wrote: >> >> Hi Brendan, >> >> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Brendan Conoboy <blc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> On 03/26/2013 04:49 PM, Graeme Russ wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> 4. Relocatable kernel (like x86) >>> >>> >>> If I understand correctly it already is relocatable. This is simply the >>> address that uboot is instructed to load the kernel into memory at. >> >> >> So why worry? Just have the load address in the U-Boot environment. > > > Because uboot's bootm does not handling the relocation? Ah, I think I get it now. The x86 relocatable kernel is truly relocatable - the kernel itself figures out where is has been loaded and performs some adjustments >> Not 100% sure the mechanics of U-Boot loading an ARM kernel but I >> think it just loads it blindly where it is told to (i.e. does not >> analyse the header) I just realised I got this a bit wrong - mkimage make a U-Boot image with a header which contains the kernel load address. Not sure what mkimage does to the Linux kernel binary itself > That would make more sense (This was my understanding as well, actually), > but we're still having an issue: The uImage header, stored in RAM, has a > load address that is wrong for some platforms. Unless we're going to change > that with an in-uboot memory editor, bootm will honor the address in that > header and the boot will fail. I think this is worth raising on the U-Boot ML Regards, Graeme _______________________________________________ arm mailing list arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
