From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jens Gehrlein <sew_s@tqs.de>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 08:55:26 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot-Users] post memory test
In-Reply-To: <20071116192117.42A7224887@gemini.denx.de>
References: <20071116192117.42A7224887@gemini.denx.de>
Message-ID: <4741416E.1040707@tqs.de>
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

Wolfgang Denk schrieb:
> In message <473D9B54.1010304@tqs.de> you wrote:
>>> As an example look at initdram() in board/Marvell/db64460/sdram_init.c
>>> where the platform uses Block Address Translations (BATs) to map RAM
>>> but exhausts these pretty scarce ressources and limits itself to
>>> mapping only the first 256MB (a usual limit for a BAT).
>> So it is possible to overlay the function memory_post_test() by a
>> board specific routine, which may cover almost all RAM?
> 
> Everything is possible - this is software, so anything can be done.
> You can even make pigs fly. But not everything does make sense.
> 
>> BTW, is it possible to overlay _all_ POST routines by board specific
>> routines?
> 
> It could be done, but I consider it a very, very bad idea.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Wolfgang Denk
> 
And what if the tests wouldn't meet certain requirements of the
developer or customer or if it had to be adapted to CPU- or
board-specific conditions?
I suppose, you wouldn't like much "#ifdef <CPU>"s or "#ifdef <board>"s
in common code.
Could you please make a proposal to solve this and to get such code
into the official U-Boot tree?

Kind regards
    Jens