From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Scott Wood Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 16:34:17 -0600 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5 12/23] Add spl load feature In-Reply-To: (from sjg@chromium.org on Tue Feb 12 16:23:21 2013) Message-ID: <1360708457.24612.13@snotra> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 02/12/2013 04:23:21 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > +Albert > > Hi Scott, > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Scott Wood > wrote: > > On 02/08/2013 09:12:08 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > >> > >> This adds secondary program loader support to the generic board. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > >> --- > >> Changes in v5: None > >> Changes in v4: None > >> Changes in v3: None > >> Changes in v2: None > >> > >> common/board_f.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/common/board_f.c b/common/board_f.c > >> index aa10f4b..3a8036f 100644 > >> --- a/common/board_f.c > >> +++ b/common/board_f.c > >> @@ -309,6 +309,7 @@ static int reserve_uboot(void) > >> return 0; > >> } > >> > >> +#ifndef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD > >> /* reserve memory for malloc() area */ > >> static int reserve_malloc(void) > >> { > >> @@ -328,6 +329,7 @@ static int reserve_board(void) > >> sizeof(bd_t), gd->dest_addr_sp); > >> return 0; > >> } > >> +#endif > >> > >> static int setup_machine(void) > >> { > >> @@ -365,6 +367,7 @@ static int reserve_fdt(void) > >> return 0; > >> } > >> > >> +#ifndef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD > >> static int reserve_stacks(void) > >> { > >> /* setup stack pointer for exceptions */ > >> @@ -384,6 +387,17 @@ static int reserve_stacks(void) > >> > >> return 0; > >> } > >> +#endif > >> + > >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD > >> +static int reserve_stacks_spl(void) > >> +{ > >> + /* Why not -= ? */ > >> + gd->dest_addr_sp += 128; /* leave 32 words for > abort-stack > >> */ > >> + gd->irq_sp = gd->dest_addr_sp; > >> + return 0; > >> +} > >> +#endif > > > > > > "abort-stack" doesn't sound very generic, and that "why not" > question should > > probably be answered. > > I'm not sure what you mean by the first comment. It's ARM-specific terminology ("exception" is more typical than "abort" elsewhere). Why 32 words, BTW? Why is it larger in SPL versus non-SPL? -Scott