Re: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 3/3] mpc83xx: cleanup System Part and Revision ID Register (SPRIDR) code
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:01:30 +0100 "Joakim Tjernlund" Joakim.Tjernlund@transmode.se wrote:
BTW, what happened to relocation stuff Grant was doing? It is still disabled, I never had any problems so perhaps time to turn it on again? it might even make u-boot smaller once all the old manuel relocation code has been properly disabled.
beats me. I'm all for it, but I think we're still supposed to support a wide range of toolchain versions (the reason Grant's stuff got reverted).
Kim
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Kim Phillips kim.phillips@freescale.com wrote:
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:01:30 +0100 "Joakim Tjernlund" Joakim.Tjernlund@transmode.se wrote:
BTW, what happened to relocation stuff Grant was doing? It is still disabled, I never had any problems so perhaps time to turn it on again? it might even make u-boot smaller once all the old manuel relocation code has been properly disabled.
beats me. I'm all for it, but I think we're still supposed to support a wide range of toolchain versions (the reason Grant's stuff got reverted).
The main problem is not really understanding how gcc wants to handle relocation. I've got no idea what needs to be different between versions of gcc. Someone with greater gcc powers than I needs to take a look at it.
g.
-----Original Message----- From: glikely@secretlab.ca [mailto:glikely@secretlab.ca] On Behalf Of Grant Likely Sent: den 29 mars 2008 00:12 To: Kim Phillips Cc: Joakim Tjernlund; u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 3/3] mpc83xx: cleanup System Part and Revision ID Register (SPRIDR) code
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Kim Phillips kim.phillips@freescale.com wrote:
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:01:30 +0100 "Joakim Tjernlund" Joakim.Tjernlund@transmode.se wrote:
BTW, what happened to relocation stuff Grant was doing? It is still disabled, I never had any problems so perhaps time to turn it on again? it might even make u-boot smaller once all the old manuel relocation code has been properly disabled.
beats me. I'm all for it, but I think we're still supposed to support a wide range of toolchain versions (the reason Grant's stuff got reverted).
The main problem is not really understanding how gcc wants to handle relocation. I've got no idea what needs to be different between versions of gcc. Someone with greater gcc powers than I needs to take a look at it.
g.
I am no gcc expert, but perhaps listing which gcc's that don't work is a god start? What archs were problematic? only ppc? There was a register bug for ppc that WD fixed a little while ago, maybe that will help.
Jocke
participants (3)
-
Grant Likely -
Joakim Tjernlund -
Kim Phillips