On Monday 21 April 2008, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
In message 200804210635.08416.vapier@gentoo.org you wrote:
go [ -cache={off,d-off,i-off,on,d-on,i-on} ] addr [ args ... ]
cache is just an example. other arches may want to do other sort of "system breakdown/cleanup" before relinquishing control. option flags to commands
As the situation is, other arches seem to be just fine as it. It's only BF which needs a pork sausage.
this is incorrect. any architecture which wants to overwrite u-boot sanely needs to worry about causing exceptions or interrupts. i just want to make the obvious easy since it has caused more than enough support requests.
really doesnt fit the style of u-boot (i expect that sort of painful option parsing in redboot, not really u-boot).
I don;t like it either, but just ading random new commands is even worse.
so we can do: go [-noret] addr [args...]
Ummm... "no return" programs is just an example. Other pograms may want to do other sort of "system breakdown/cleanup" before relin- quishing control.
or we can add "jump" to cmd_boot.c and merge the differences by just using > a function pointer to "do_go_exec" or "do_jump_exec".
Adn then we add "call" and "exec" and "do" and so oon just for other needed options? I say no.
then implement whatever. in the mean time i'll keep forking the Blackfin code.
i never said Blackfin was the only thing that mattered. in fact, my goal is to make it so that people using this facility get a more standard initial environment before they start taking over the system. i guess i wont point out the U-Boot policy about not using interrupts ...
Are you aware that U-Boot does use interrupts here and there? That we actually provide functions to register interrupt handlers to standalone programs, etc. ?
yes i'm aware, but we arent talking about standalone applications here, so those really dont matter. -mike