Dear "GROYER, Anthony",
In message BC0A2F434D4F39448D24A68EA6EFFB9F0194D534@EU-FR-EXBE07.eu.corp.airliquide.com you wrote:
The use of the initial patches for the CONFIG_SYS_SKIP_ARM_RELOCATION featu res has revealed two issues.
Could you please restict your line length to some 70 characters or so? Thanks.
First issue: the calculation of the relocation offset was done only if the relocation is actually done. So we could reach a point where r9 has a wrong value, since it has never been used before (in my case, this bug happens w
This is a configuration error then, isn't it? The relocation offset should be either the intended value, or eventually zero, if no relocation is intended.
the test of a relocation need.
Second issue: board_init_r was thinking the memory area for the malloc is j ust below the code, whereas the board_init_f had allocated some space for t he malloc at the end of the SDRAM. If the code is located at the base of th
This is a broken memory layout then, i. e. another configuration error.
So actually both your "issues" are caused by configuration errors and should go away if you fix your system configuration.
BTW: your patch has a number ofd coduing style errors, and the Signed-off-by: line is missing.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk