On Mon, Nov 05, 2007, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
In message 20071105161853.GA28049@sig21.net you wrote:
So I now only need two tiny patches:
fix warning: "warning: target CPU does not support interworking" when compiling with CodeSourcery gcc-4.2.1/binutils-2.18.50
diff -ruNp u-boot-1.3.0-rc3/cpu/arm920t/config.mk u-boot-1.3.0-rc3.my/cpu/arm920t/config.mk --- u-boot-1.3.0-rc3/cpu/arm920t/config.mk 2007-10-14 00:13:19.000000000 +0200 +++ u-boot-1.3.0-rc3.my/cpu/arm920t/config.mk 2007-11-05 14:31:19.000000000 +0100 @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ PLATFORM_RELFLAGS += -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -ffixed-r8 \ -msoft-float
-PLATFORM_CPPFLAGS += -march=armv4 +PLATFORM_CPPFLAGS += -march=armv4t
Has this change been verified by anybody using another toolchain?
I'm still hoping someone else will test it. If all else fails I could download and install ELDK or whatever and test myself, but it feels wrong if I'd have to do that.
fix compile error: "start.S:205: Error: invalid constant (20200) after fixup"
diff -ruNp u-boot-1.3.0-rc3/include/configs/kb9202.h u-boot-1.3.0-rc3.my/include/configs/kb9202.h --- u-boot-1.3.0-rc3/include/configs/kb9202.h 2007-10-14 00:13:19.000000000 +0200 +++ u-boot-1.3.0-rc3.my/include/configs/kb9202.h 2007-11-05 14:37:17.000000000 +0100 @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ /*
- Size of malloc() pool
*/ -#define CFG_MALLOC_LEN (CFG_ENV_SIZE + 128*1024) +#define CFG_MALLOC_LEN (128*1024)
This is definitely a bad change; reducing the size of thje malloc area below what is actually needed is not a good ide. Also, I don't see why this change would be needed. If there is a compi8le problem, the reason for that problem should be located and fixed, without changing this code.
This is a definitve NAK for this change, as it fixzes the symptoms while leaving the problem unfixed.
Well ARM assembly only accepts immediate values with certain properties (representable as an 8-bit value plus a 5-bit shift or something, I forgot the details). My ARM assembly skills are pretty weak, so changing start.S to accept an arbitrary constant is out of scope for me. We could maybe just set CFG_MALLOC_LEN to 132*1024 (untested), or we could move the CFG_MALLOC_LEN down in the file next to the
#ifdef CONFIG_KB9202 #define CFG_ENV_OFFSET 0x3E00 #define CFG_ENV_SIZE 0x0200 #define CFG_MALLOC_LEN (CFG_ENV_SIZE + 128*1024 + 0x4e00) #else #define CFG_ENV_OFFSET 0x1000 #define CFG_ENV_SIZE 0x1000 #define CFG_MALLOC_LEN (CFG_ENV_SIZE + 128*1024 + 0x3000) #endif
to show how they depend on each other, or if you know how to express the ARM restrictions in a C macro we could use that.
I'm open for suggestions, but with a simple NAK I don't know what to do and it will stay unfixed.
Thanks, Johannes