[U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] Blackfin: implement go/boote wrappers

[Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>]

On Monday 21 April 2008, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <200804202031.31936.vapier@gentoo.org> you wrote:
> > > Umnmm... no. "go" is supposed to be return to U-Boot, i. e. it must
> > > not overwrite (or otherwise meddle with) any U-Boot code.
> > >
> > > I think you should not change cache status for "go".
> >
> > reality is that people often times use go to execute their binary blobs. 
> > i also see it this way: go means to jump to some address and most likely
> > never return.
>
> This may be your private interpretation, but it is wrong.
>
> Intended and documented behaviour is that "go" is used to start
> standalone applications, which are supposed to return.

then how exactly are people supposed to execute their flat binaries ?  none of 
the other boot methods allow for straight jumps that i'm aware of.  otherwise 
i'm going to have to add even more bloat to add a slight variation on the go 
command: one where the documentation doesnt require it to return.
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20080421/ac68d99c/attachment.pgp