From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jerry Van Baren Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 06:54:08 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 6/17] Reorganize and fix problems (returns) in the bootm command. In-Reply-To: References: <20070705011559.GF21474@cideas.com> Message-ID: <468CCDD0.2020208@gmail.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Grant Likely wrote: > On 7/4/07, Jerry Van Baren wrote: >> Do *NOT* return after the "point of no return" has been passed. >> If something goes wrong, the board must be reset after that point. >> Move the "Transferring control to Linux" debug message back to where it >> belongs: just before transferring control to linux. > > Why is it necessary to reset the board at this point? The failure > paths here seem to be things like invalid checksums and the like. Why > are these tests after a point of no return? > > I would think that if any of these failures are hit, you would *not* > want to reset the board so you can figure out what was going on. > > Cheers, > g. We've smashed our underpinnings by uncompressing linux over our interrupt vectors before the checksum catches the problem. There is no way back other than a reset. The error I fixed (in a couple of places) was returns. FWIIW, my experience with the erroneous returns is that it sort of works, but not right and then funky stuff happens. :-/ I presume the comment was a general one. If you have any specific reset vs. return questions, hollar and I'll justify them or eat crow. Thanks, gvb