[U-Boot-Users] what is wrong when calloc return bogus?
r-woodruff2 at ti.com
Thu Nov 13 18:53:50 CET 2003
You say loading.....are you starting from flash, then relocating to the
middle or RAM _or_ are you using something to download a binary image into
the middle of memory, then trying to execute it?
There aren't that many files to configure, it should be straight forward to
find. JTAG is a wonderful thing, you should take the time to get it
working...assuming your hardware has wired it up correctly.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew S. McClintock [mailto:mattsm at arlut.utexas.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 11:45 AM
> To: Woodruff, Richard
> Cc: Holger Schurig; u-boot-users at lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: RE: [U-Boot-Users] what is wrong when calloc return bogus?
> Ahh ok, we are using that code you mention. I thought for a
> second there was another CVS branch or something for the
> ARM925 tree which did not make sense but I thought I would
> ask. Our board is still failing at malloc. Our board is
> _very_ similar to the Innovator 1510 and we are using most of
> that code as a starting point. We are loading u-boot right in
> the middle of our memory so it should have plenty of space
> above and below the u-boot code for malloc. I don't have a
> JTAG debugger working well with our board so I have tracked
> down the problems I have mentioned using printf statements.
> The area of memory set aside for malloc is valid unused
> memory space I just can not quite see why malloc is failing.
> If you have any ideas, feel free to let me know otherwise I
> will keep debugging it.
> This is our output without our printf statements, however its
> not very helpful...
> U-Boot 1.0.1 (Nov 11 2003 - 11:29:53)
> U-Boot code: 11000000 -> 11014330 BSS: -> 11017FBC
> RAM Configuration:
> Bank #0: 10000000 32 MB
> Flash: 0 kB
> *** Warning - bad CRC, using default environment
> On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 11:29, Woodruff, Richard wrote:
> > U-boot 1.0.0 and before for the last ... ?Six months has
> had an OMAP
> > tree. Its really trivial to port from that to a new target.
> There is
> > a omap1510inn target which is the Innovator. I have a couple tress
> > which I've not yet merged in for custom boards which have a
> lot more
> > functionality, but we will do that at some point, probably
> closer to
> > the time they actually go into production.
> > Cpu/arm925 is for the arm core on the OMAP15xx. I've
> sprinkled enough
> > code in to idle the dsp but not much beyond that. The is a
> 926 tree
> > also, that is for the omap 16xx. The CPU core is common in
> a lot of
> > different SOC's, that's what the CPU was broke out separately. It
> > could have been done differently, but the hope is to allow
> sharing of
> > common code bits, not duplicate them.
> > It seems you must be using an older tree as this kind of
> thing is sort
> > of hard to miss if you have gone though the code.
> > Regards,
> > Richard W.
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Matthew S. McClintock [mailto:mattsm at arlut.utexas.edu]
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 11:20 AM
> > > To: Woodruff, Richard
> > > Cc: Holger Schurig; u-boot-users at lists.sourceforge.net
> > > Subject: RE: [U-Boot-Users] what is wrong when calloc
> return bogus?
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 17:05, Woodruff, Richard wrote:
> > >
> > > > -- If you cloned the ARM925 tree, then you should NOT see this
> > > > failure. Its probably some other kind of misconfiguration.
> > > >
> > > You mention an ARM925 tree, is there ARM925 tree for u-boot
> > > somewhere I am missing?
> > > --
> > > Matthew S. McClintock <mattsm at arlut.utexas.edu>
> > >
> > >
> Matthew S. McClintock <mattsm at arlut.utexas.edu>
More information about the U-Boot