On Monday 06 February 2012 08:19 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Graeme Russgraeme.russ@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Wolfgang,
On 02/06/2012 06:51 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Graeme Russ,
In messageCALButC+==qGs5EaAHtQqU4zEjqvg-3187eWaqU-fv3dWp5QQ7w@mail.gmail.com you wrote:
I think the immediate focus should be on centralising the init sequence processing into /common/init.c and then bringing the new'initcall' architecture online
Agreed.
Once these have been done, any board can just specific:
SKIP_INIT(RELOC)
I will probably object to his, too - for the same reasons.
Considering this is a 'free' artefact of how the init sequence functions, and that it is board specific and totally non-invasive for anyone else (i.e. no ugly ifdef's anywhere else in the code) I'm surprised you would object...
To pick up Wolfgang's argument, but why do we want to skip relocation? You can debug through it, it's documented (official wiki has GDB, over in TI-land, the wiki page for CCS has the bits for doing it in that Eclipse-based env, other debuggers I'm sure have a similar "now add symbols at this offset from link" option) and the end result makes it very easy for end-users to break their world (default kernel load addrs being where U-Boot would be).
Why do all that circus if it's not adding any value for a given platform. Also, in the previous thread on this I had pointed out a specific case where this was hurting us. On a slow FPGA platform the delay due to the relocation was getting magnified and un-necessarily wasting our time.
best regards, Aneesh