From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A1FEB718A
	for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>;
	Fri, 10 Sep 2010 08:49:57 +1000 (EST)
Subject: Re: CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING broken on 83xx (and all of powerpc?)
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
In-Reply-To: <20100909173735.503c4cc0@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net>
References: <20100908232124.GB30291@ovro.caltech.edu>
	<1283994156.6515.6.camel@pasglop>
	<20100909025214.GA21846@ovro.caltech.edu>
	<1284001096.6515.33.camel@pasglop>
	<20100909162306.GA3496@ovro.caltech.edu>
	<1284069534.6515.36.camel@pasglop>
	<20100909171116.1b9b6e44@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net>
	<1284070433.6515.39.camel@pasglop>
	<20100909173735.503c4cc0@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 08:49:45 +1000
Message-ID: <1284072585.6515.44.camel@pasglop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	"Ira W. Snyder" <iws@ovro.caltech.edu>
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On Thu, 2010-09-09 at 17:37 -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> 
> Wolfgang was just defending it on the U-Boot list the past couple
> days...  seems like the main thing in its favor is the CRC, especially
> as a final check before reflashing an image.

Right, then fwd my 2 cents:

Makes sense to have a wrapper like that for flashing, but

 - It could/should contain an ELF

 - u-boot should be capable to just load/boot the ELF, not everybody
uses flashable images (netboot anyone ? espectially when debugging) and
it's really a burden to do the wrapping all the time. In addition, we
just see how it can actually hurt due to losing information such as the
BSS size.

Cheers,
Ben.