From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfgang Denk Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 10:58:53 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] relocation: Do not relocate NULL pointers. In-Reply-To: <1254784811.24664.968.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1253706706-30364-1-git-send-email-Joakim.Tjernlund@transmode.se> <1253710639.3968.19.camel@ptyser-laptop> <20090923182314.1B317832E864@gemini.denx.de> <1254112288.6589.15.camel@ptyser-laptop> <1254141946.10493.11.camel@ptyser-laptop> <1254150538.24140.2478.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20091003081345.9CFBF832E408@gemini.denx.de> <1254784811.24664.968.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20091006085853.949284C021@gemini.denx.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Dear Peter Tyser, In message <1254784811.24664.968.camel@localhost.localdomain> you wrote: > > > 1. is just a small fix the the existing asm reloc functions. Pretty much > > ready but needs some linker tweeks it seems. No idea if other > > boards than 85xx also needs a linker tweak or not. > > It looks like 85xx is the only arch that needed linker script tweaks. I > just submitted some patches a bit ago. I think this code is too complex. Eventually we could hard-wire something like ". = 0x40000" or similar for a fixed location of the (pre-relocation) bss on all 85xx/86xx systems. > > 2. is 1 in C and some common supporting asm for ppc. Any idea were > > to put common asm files for ppc? I was hoping I could get away with > > just 83xx and the rest could be done later by interested parties? > > Assuming the 85xx link script changes are accepted, what's the gameplan > now? #1 is pretty trivial (the original patch that spawned this thread > with slight tweaks) and should be easy to get in this merge window. > That would get us to the point that relocation is fully functional, > including non-relocation of NULL pointers. I think this is a nice and realistic goal for the current release. > #2 looks more involved and prone to errors as it requires some shuffling > of registers in assembly for all architectures. Are we aiming for > getting #2 across all architectures in this window? I should be able to > implement and test it on 85xx, 86xx, and 44x, and Jocke's tested on > 83xx. I don't think I could do the rest of the arches by the end of > this week though. Any other takers? Save it for the next merge window? I guess this is for next version. Um... jut to be sure - I understand that by "all architectures" above you actually mean "all Power architecture CPU families", i. e. you don't include the needed cleanup for ARM, MIPs, etc. here (yet) ? Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de 365 Days of drinking Lo-Cal beer. 1 Lite-year