Due to the flow of answers, I'm a little lost... What is the status of
this submission, should I resend it, put more work into it or lose it
?
Thanks in advance,
David
2014-02-05 Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 08:49:55AM +0100, David Vincent wrote:
>> 2014-02-04 Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> > On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 04:56:25AM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
>> >> On 10:06 Fri 31 Jan , David Vincent wrote:
>> >> > This allows to load all the lowlevel init code, including the
>> >> > uncompressor, inside SRAM and not just the bare init part. This is
>> >> > useful when pbl is used as a first-stage bootloader but is loaded by an
>> >> > external firmware.
>> >> >
>> >> > Signed-off-by: David Vincent <freesilicon@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> > ---
>> >> > arch/arm/lib/pbl.lds.S | 4 ++--
>> >> > common/Kconfig | 16 ++++++++++++++--
>> >> > include/asm-generic/barebox.lds.h | 14 +++++++++++++-
>> >> > pbl/Kconfig | 7 +++++++
>> >> > 4 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>> >> >
>> >> > diff --git a/arch/arm/lib/pbl.lds.S b/arch/arm/lib/pbl.lds.S
>> >> > index 0954c89..34c0cb3 100644
>> >> > --- a/arch/arm/lib/pbl.lds.S
>> >> > +++ b/arch/arm/lib/pbl.lds.S
>> >> > @@ -50,11 +50,11 @@ SECTIONS
>> >> > *(.text*)
>> >> > }
>> >> >
>> >> > + BAREBOX_PBL_SIZE
>> >> > +
>> >> > /* Discard unwind if enable in barebox */
>> >> > /DISCARD/ : { *(.ARM.ex*) }
>> >> >
>> >> > - BAREBOX_BARE_INIT_SIZE
>> >> > -
>> >>
>> >> nack you change the binary format you can add an information but can not
>> >> change the format
>> >
>> > I don't think the format is changed here. It shouldn't matter where the
>> > /DISCARD/ is, right? Nevertheless the patch looks more obvious if just
>> > the line is changed, not its position.
>> >
>> >> > #include <linux/stringify.h>
>> >> > /* use 2 ASSERT because ld can not accept '"size" "10"' format */
>> >> > #define BAREBOX_BARE_INIT_SIZE \
>> >> > _barebox_bare_init_size = __bare_init_end - _text; \
>> >> > ASSERT(_barebox_bare_init_size < MAX_BARE_INIT_SIZE, "Barebox bare_init size > ") \
>> >> > - ASSERT(_barebox_bare_init_size < MAX_BARE_INIT_SIZE, __stringify(MAX_BARE_INIT_SIZE)) \
>> >> > + ASSERT(_barebox_bare_init_size < MAX_BARE_INIT_SIZE, __stringify(MAX_BARE_INIT_SIZE))
>> >> different patch
>> >
>> > This just removes the trailing '\' which is necessary here.
>>
>> It isn't obvious for me why the trailing '\' is necessary but you know
>> better than me so I will put it back and add one on the next
>> definition.
>
> I wasn't clear. What I meant is that it's necessary to remove the
> whitespace. But as said, I misread the patch anyway.
>
> 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
