Le 02/12/2010 09:13, Wolfgang Denk a écrit :
Dear Albert ARIBAUD,
In message4CF74FED.2030102@free.fr you wrote:
BTW... Why on Earth is it an uint8? Probably a space saving measure, but one I think is not really fruitful, because of probable paddings and alignments; making it an int would allow using smsc_id directly as values for the OMAP3EVM_BOARD_GEN_1 and OMAP3EVM_BOARD_GEN_2...
... plus it removes the linker warning!
Oops. Why would this make a difference?
Alignement issues, possibly, although we do align the location pointer before the overlay point -- or some bug in the linker.
I thus suggest turning omap3_evm_version from uint8 to int and get on with debugging the board.
No, I don't think this is a good idea as it just papers over an existing problem.
Oh--I did not mean to forget the linker warning thing. Just separate the issues, because I think this particular linker warning is unrelated with getting the board working.
So Sanjeev would change the u8 to an int and proceed with board debug, and I would investigate this issue -- actually, try and find a minimal example that I could go to the binutils list with rather than a full-blown u-boot tree.
Does it help when you change the "*(.bss)" in "arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds" into "*(.*bss)" (so it also includes any .sbss objects) ?
No change.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
Amicalement,