On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:52:19AM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> Simply do the same as barebox and hope for the best as u-boot does not handle
> runtime address detection for boot quite often. It does only execpt you to
> choose as compiling time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/arm/lib/bootm.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/lib/bootm.c b/arch/arm/lib/bootm.c
> index 599b09a..71200be 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/lib/bootm.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/lib/bootm.c
> @@ -315,6 +315,12 @@ static struct image_handler barebox_handler = {
> .filetype = filetype_arm_barebox,
> };
>
> +static struct image_handler uboot_handler = {
> + .name = "ARM u-boot",
> + .bootm = do_bootm_barebox,
> + .filetype = filetype_arm_uboot,
> +};
> +
Wolfgang always emphasizes that it's not possible to start U-Boot second
stage. Most U-Boot images indeed do not support this without hacking the
lowlevel code. We can't support this feature which happens to work on
only some U-Boot images.
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
