29 Jul
2008
29 Jul
'08
11:55 p.m.
On Jul 29, 2008, at 4:25 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
In message <2A2FDF2A-7B9D-496C-960C- A7A0BDCE412C@kernel.crashing.org> you wrote:
Is there any concern with moving .bss outside of the image? On 85xx the images have historically been a fixed size (512k) and the .bss has always lived inside of that region. We are now getting to a point that .text + .data + .bss exceeds 512k. Its easy enough to move .bss right pass the 512k boundary and wanted to see if anyone can think of a reason not to do this.
You have to make sure that the memory map is still OK in the relocated system, taking into account for config options like pRAM, shared log buffer, frame buffer, ...
Ok. I think that all works out ok because _end is after .bss.
- k