From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C5ED67B63 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2006 15:15:08 +1000 (EST) Received: from root by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1G7mas-0003wR-3a for linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org; Tue, 01 Aug 2006 07:15:02 +0200 Received: from adsl-63-204-19-188.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net ([63.204.19.188]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 01 Aug 2006 07:15:02 +0200 Received: from chichkov by adsl-63-204-19-188.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 01 Aug 2006 07:15:02 +0200 To: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org From: "Dmitry Chichkov" Subject: Re: U-Boot and kernel 2.6 Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 22:12:45 -0700 Message-ID: References: <4418.62.48.238.11.1086803257.squirrel@alumni.deec.uc.pt> Sender: news List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Ricardo, I would recommend not to try old versions of U-Boot ("from 2.4") with new linux kernels ("2.6"). We had some troubles with invalid memory mappings in this configuration. -- Regards, Dmitry Chichkov "Ricardo DIz" ???????/???????? ? ???????? ?????????: news:4418.62.48.238.11.1086803257.squirrel@alumni.deec.uc.pt... > > Hi, > > I'm trying to boot a custom 860T board using the latest kernel from > linuxppc-2.5. The board is currently using a variation of an old version > of U-Boot (0.2.0) along with a hacked 2.4.20 linux kernel version. > > My first aim is to boot a simple kernel and make it get to a shell. For > that I compiled the kernel, but did not compiled u-boot with a recent > version. > > When booting, the kernel got uncompressed, but then it resets! I presume > the watchdog (which is enabled), is resetting the processor, so I guess > booting just stalls. Was there any changes in the way parameters were > received by the kernel since 2.4.20? > > Oh, I forgot to mention the compiler. I'm still using a gcc 2.95 > cross-compiler, altough I tried using a gcc 3.2 cross-compiler for the > 8260 once, but got the same result. > > I followed a recent thread very similar to this, but that turned out to be > just a matter of UART configuration, and I don't thinks this is the case. > > Any thoughts? > > Thanks in advance, > Ricardo Diz > > ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See > http://lists.linuxppc.org/ > >