From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Felix Radensky <felix@embedded-sol.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 12:44:42 +0300
Subject: [U-Boot] Incorrect CONFIG_SYS_MONITOR_LEN on MPC85xx boards
In-Reply-To: <15441F0C-BCE7-4490-8DB5-138E8E1359C7@kernel.crashing.org>
References: <4A8D2A1D.2080300@embedded-sol.com>
	<15441F0C-BCE7-4490-8DB5-138E8E1359C7@kernel.crashing.org>
Message-ID: <4A910F8A.7070803@embedded-sol.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

Hi, Kumar

I don't see any immediate problem with current FSL definitions
except they are confusing.

I think my proposal will not work on platforms like MPC8572,
MPC8536, and P2020DS where  TEXT_BASE is defined as
0xeff80000 instead of 0xfff80000. Can you please  explain the
reason why TEXT_BASE defined differently for these boards.

Thanks.

Felix.

Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On Aug 20, 2009, at 5:49 AM, Felix Radensky wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> All FSL MPC85xx boards define CONFIG_SYS_MONITOR_LEN as 256K
>> although actual size of u-boot binary is 512K. XES Xpedite boards 
>> seem to do
>> the right thing.
>>
>> I was wandering whether CONFIG_SYS_MONITOR_LEN for 85xx boards
>> can be defined in terms of CONFIG_SYS_MONITOR_BASE, similar to AMCC
>> boards ?
>>
>> #define CONFIG_SYS_MONITOR_LEN    (0xFFFFFFFF - 
>> CONFIG_SYS_MONITOR_BASE + 1)
>
> I don't have any issue w/such a fix but would like to know what the 
> implication is of having thing set the way we do on the FSL boards.  
> Is there some bug we'd hit?
I don't think there's some bug
>
> - k