On Aug 6, 2008, at 1:50 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
In message <Pine.LNX. 4.64.0808060127560.20220@blarg.am.freescale.net> you wrote:
Moving the interrupt vectors to low memory can cause issues if the code gets overwritten via some image loading command (tftp, boot*, etc.) and interrupts (like the decrementer are enabled).
Oops? This is expected and normal behaviour. Did anybody complain about this?
Real, any reason why? I understand on classic PPC this might be the case but I see no reason for it to be so on book-e parts.
On 85xx there is no reason to copy the interrupt vectors to low memory since we can run them in high memory since we are a Book-E core.
High memory means leave them in flash?
No I leave them at the relocated location in DDR.
Then you will probably see nice crashes as soon as you erase U-Boot for example to install a new version.
All references to flash memory must be relocated to RAM, including the exception vectors, of course.
Any they are. I'm just removing a second relocation that is a hold over from how 6xx PPC exception vectors work.
Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala galak@kernel.crashing.org
This is a fix for 1.3.4.
I don't think so. Seems to introduce a bug.
I disagree with that. It resolved a bug when I did. 'setenv autostart no; bootm'
- k