From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from natsmtp00.rzone.de (natsmtp00.rzone.de [81.169.145.165]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 107536830E for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 01:06:45 +1000 (EST) From: Stefan Roese To: Matt Porter Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 17:06:23 +0200 References: <200509191302.15462.sr@denx.de> <20050919065942.A25356@cox.net> In-Reply-To: <20050919065942.A25356@cox.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200509191706.24298.sr@denx.de> Cc: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ppc32: cleanup AMCC PPC4xx eval boards to better support U-Boot List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Matt, On Monday 19 September 2005 15:59, Matt Porter wrote: > On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 01:02:14PM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote: > > Just to be sure: The 44x boot-wrapper approach you mention is > > "boot/simple/pibs.c"? > > Yes, there's both boot/simple/pibs.c and boot/simple/openbios.c that > were created so we could have the default firmware and u-boot use the > same kernel build. Yes, that's what I thought. But Eugene mentioned, that he boots vmlinux without any boot-wrapper on the OpenBIOS targets (except Ebony probably). You would loose this possibility, if I add this wrapper and switch from OpenBIOS to U-Boot bd_info struct in the kernel. Did I miss something here? How should I proceed? Best regards, Stefan