On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 06:09:38AM -0700, Andrey Smirnov wrote: > > How about testing only a small fragment of DRAM, say 8MB, in your > > lowlevel board code and calling barebox_arm_entry() with the > > membase/memsize you previously tested? This way you can make sure that > > barebox only uses tested memory without having to test all memory before > > calling barebox_arm_entry() and without having to call back into some > > testing function. > > I like that solution and it does allow to get rid of all of that nasty > linking address agnostic code. The only problem that I see with it is > that if I start Barebox with 8MB of memory and then try to boot Linux > of_memory_fixup() will modify the devicetree file and cause Linux to > think the machine only has 8MB of RAM as well. Any ideas on how to > deal with that? You should pass a size of 8MB to barebox_arm_entry(). This should not influence the memory banks which are for determing the memory passed to Linux. You can instrument barebox_add_memory_bank() which should be called with the real amount of SDRAM, not with the 8MB. If not, add a dump_stack() to see who calls this function with the wrong amount. 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
