[U-Boot] Weird issues with u-boot on Microblaze
Dana Goyette
dgoyette at calpoly.edu
Mon Aug 24 20:53:29 CEST 2009
Michal Simek wrote:
>
> this code can't be compiled - you have bad setting. MONITOR_BASE is always on lower address then
> FLASH address. Check that your ram on lower address than your flash - this is check by u-boot.bsp too.
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Michal
>
>
>
>
>
Thanks for that help, and thanks for updating your git repository. I
had previously forgotten about the "flash must be above RAM" limitation.
I had forgotten, and had rebuilt the project without re-running the BSP,
after making the mistake of doing "generate addresses".
I've now rebuild the project and BSP with RAM at 0x10000000 and Flash at
0x20000000, but I'm now getting a linking error:
u-boot-microblaze/net/eth.c:202: relocation truncated to fit:
R_MICROBLAZE_32_PCREL_LO against symbol `board_eth_init' defined in text
section in
board/xilinx/microblaze-generic/libmicroblaze-generic.a(microblaze-generic.o)
I've looked up the error, and about the closest thing I could find was
this -- something about "longcall" attribute:
http://www.mail-archive.com/u-boot@lists.denx.de/msg04518.html
http://fixunix.com/vxworks/48336-how-solve-error-relocation-truncated-fit-r_arm_pc24.html
In Microblaze, do the absolute address values matter, or just the
relative positioning?
I also imagine that perhaps the CompactFlash issues originated from the
incorrect clock rate.
Thanks again for the help.
More information about the U-Boot
mailing list