On 03/07/2012 11:36 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > On 11:40 Wed 07 Mar , Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 03/07/2012 11:08 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: >>> On 17:30 Tue 06 Mar , Stephen Warren wrote: >>>> This allows the user to use U-Boot's mkimage's -T kernel_noload option >>>> if their arch Kconfig allows it, and they desire. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> The next patch enables this new CONFIG_ALLOW_ option for ARM. I assume >>>> that some other architectures will also be able to enable it, but I'm >>>> not familiar enough with any to know which. >>> I'm going to repeat. I don't think any impromevent here. >>> >>> with no specific kernel load address the uImage for is useless/ >> >> No, the whole point of this type of kernel image is that it doesn't need >> a specific load address; the kernel zImage can run from anywhere in RAM >> (provided AUTO_ZRELADDR is enabled, subject to some slight >> restrictions), and hence the uImage doesn't need to be loaded to or >> moved to any particular location. >> >> The scripts that U-Boot runs determine where the image gets loaded into >> memory. > > so instead of spending time on the uImage add simply the support the zImage to > U-Boot as this AUTO_ZRELADDR have 0 advantage compare to the zImage Thinking more about this, I guess the reliance on AUTO_ZRELADDR is wrong here; Russell, Nico, is the ARM decompressor fully position-independent irrespective of the AUTO_ZRELADDR setting. That setting just determines where the decompressor writes its output, not what address the decompressor can run at, right? So, this KERNEL_NOLOAD feature could be enabled in all cases on ARM, not only when AUTO_ZRELADDR is enabled. As such to address Jean-Christophe's most recent comment above, this patch isn't about adding support for AUTO_ZRELADDR, but for U-Boot's kernel_noload feature, so comparisons should be drawn between kernel_noload uImages and zImage, not between AUTO_ZRELADDR and zImage. In other words: We already have and need ZRELADDR no matter what, for reasons unrelated to U-Boot/uImage. Patch 1 in this series is just consolidating duplicate definitions, and doesn't introduce any new features, so I think hope you think it's a good thing no matter what anyone thinks about U-Boot/uImage. I assume you're only arguing about patches 2 and 3? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
