From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <3879B10F.D6C21C0F@ict.ac.cn> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 18:14:39 +0800 From: LiuTao Mime-Version: 1.0 To: "Shuangjun Zhu (r44089)" , LinuxPPC Developers List , "linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org" Subject: Re: ;X84: problem with gunzip() References: <003001bf5b47$6aeebe20$73f102de@sjzhu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gb2312 Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: You mean the extenal interrupt enable bit? It's really disabled before gunzip. LiuTao Shuangjun Zhu wrote: > > Before you gunzip the kernel, clear the interrupt bit in the > machine status register. > > -----Original Message----- > From: LiuTao > To: LinuxPPC Developers List ; linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org > > Date: Monday, January 10, 2000 4:43 PM > Subject: problem with gunzip() > > > > >Hi > > > >When I ported linux to a board with MPC860, 16M RAM and 2M Flash, > >I met a problem. > >After the program gunzip()(misc.c) the vmlinux image to address 0x0, > >the contents from 0x0 to IMAGE_SIZE should be as same as that in > >linux/vmlinux, right? I found that they are not same. Only from 0x0 > >to about 0xb500, they are same. > >I don't think gunzip() has any problem. > >Do you have any suggestions? > >Thanks! > > > >LiuTao > > ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/