From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 23:06:23 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/3] image: Make image_get_fdt work like
	image_get_{ram_disk, kernel}
In-Reply-To: <20111105214056.7396E1893014@gemini.denx.de>
References: <1320164902-24190-1-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com>
	<201111051941.38920.marek.vasut@gmail.com>
	<20111105214056.7396E1893014@gemini.denx.de>
Message-ID: <201111052306.23919.marek.vasut@gmail.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

> Dear Marek Vasut,
> 
> In message <201111051941.38920.marek.vasut@gmail.com> you wrote:
> > this patchset is good and all, but can we not also introduce cmd_zload to
> > load zImages? Wolfgang, today's ARM hardware will really benefit from
> > that, uImage holds us back a lot these days. Other option is to extend
> > cmd_bootm() to load zImages.
> 
> uImage holds us back? And hardware will benefit from that?

Well you put out quite a good reason in the other mail for uImage. Now the 
problem basically is the negotiation between linux and uboot as of who has to 
wrap the image into what envelope. I don't see this happening actually, which 
sucks.
> 
> I can't parse that.  Could you please elucidate?
> 
> What exactly _is_ the problem of uImage?

The exact problem here is it loads the kernel to fixed address.

> 
> Or have you ever considered using a FIT image?

That looks good, yes.

> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Wolfgang Denk