From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ulf Samuelsson Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 21:41:41 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] [Patch 2/4] U-Boot-V2: ARM: introduceCONFIG_SKIP_RELOCATION References: <20080507175625.84CD8248EC@gemini.denx.de> Message-ID: <090101c8b082$59fa6bc0$060514ac@atmel.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de >> CONFIG_RELOCATABLE on powerpc means something different. On arm we start >> U-Boot by running it at an address != link address and _copy_ (not >> relocate) ourselves to the address we are linked at. On powerpc real >> relocation is done if CONFIG_RELOCATABLE is enabled. >> Hence the option you wanted to add should better have the name >> CONFIG_SKIP_COPY_TO_SDRAM or something like that. > > This is something that I always wanted to fix. The ARM implementation > is broken by design - unfortunately it has been also used for MIPS, > and other architectures. It would be much better if we had real > relocation to a (dynamically determined) address on ARM too, instead > of such a fixed mapping. > > Best regards, > > Wolfgang Denk > As more and more architectures support booting from just about anything than a parallel flash, maybe it is better to have a CONFIG_COPY_TO_SDRAM than its negative form. Whats the big benefit of beeing able to select where U-boot runs? I could understand if there was a need for a compile time parameter. Best Regards Ulf Samuelsson