[U-Boot-Users] bootm change for standalone images
Wolfgang Denk
wd at denx.de
Wed Jul 28 23:22:07 CEST 2004
In message <1091044779.17855.13.camel at mud> you wrote:
>
> > I don't think that this is a "generic" OS.
>
> Do you not like the name. Are you concerned with belittling RTEMS?
I don't like the term "generic OS" because IMHO there is no such
thing.
> > Frankly, I don't like it.
>
> Any reason why or just a gut feeling?
A bit more than this, but difficult to put in words.
What you have is clearly NOT a U-Boot standalone application - which,
by definition, will be based on services provided by U-Boot and after
succesful completion will return to U-Boot. Since you overwrite the
exception vector code you cannot use U-Boot services, and you cannot
return.
So you must have something different...
> I just wanted it to be small and simple. It seems like
Yes, I understand this.
> Would you prefer something like this?
> ....
> case IH_TYPE_STANDALONE:
...
> case IH_TYPE_STANDALONE_DISABLE_IRQ:
No, of course not - see above. The environment for U-Boot standalone
applications is well defined (at least in my head), and it does NOT
allow you to overwrite any of U-Boot's code, including the exception
vectors.
To avoid duplicating code or to use misleading names I see two simple
options: (1) just use "-O RTEMS" when building your images and gnash
your teeth when you see "RTEMS" printed instead of
"your_custom_code_without_a_proper_name", or (2) give your code a
name which we can add as new OS type, and let's use the RTEMS booter
for your new "OS", too.
I think I'd like to see you chosing (1).
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88 Email: wd at denx.de
Behind every great man, there is a woman -- urging him on.
-- Harry Mudd, "I, Mudd", stardate 4513.3
More information about the U-Boot
mailing list