[U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] ppc: Revert patch 70431e8a that used _start instead of CFG_MONITOR_BASE

[Joakim Tjernlund]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kim Phillips [mailto:kim.phillips at freescale.com]
> Sent: den 21 april 2008 23:05
> To: Kim Phillips
> Cc: Stefan Roese; u-boot-users at lists.sourceforge.net; joakim.tjernlund at transmode.se
> Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] ppc: Revert patch 70431e8a that used _start instead of
> CFG_MONITOR_BASE
> 
> On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:45:02 -0500
> Kim Phillips <kim.phillips at freescale.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed,  9 Apr 2008 12:56:42 +0200
> > Stefan Roese <sr at denx.de> wrote:
> >
> > > The patch 70431e8a7393b6b793f77957f95b999fc9a269b8 (Make MPC83xx one step
> > > closer to full relocation.) doesn't use CFG_MONITOR_BASE anymore. But
> > > on 4xx systems _start currently cannot be used for this calculation.
> > > So revert back to the original version for now.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Roese <sr at denx.de>
> >
> > Acked-by: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips at freescale.com>
> >
> hmm..I seem to have false-acked this due to a bug in a build script of
> mine.
> 
> Currently WD's top of tree renders 83xx kaput.  When I revert this
> revert plus Joakim's original 70431e8 commit, things are back to
> normal.  I'm not going to pretend I know to fix it up correctly, so
> does anyone have a problem with me sending two revert patches until
> relocation is properly and comprehensively fixed?

Strange, I got a 8321 and it worked for me. Maybe a toolchain issue? Perhaps
I got something extra in my board port, dunno what though.

If you revert it we are probably not going to solve it. I got no clue
though. Are any other 83xx users out there?

 Jocke