[U-Boot] [PATCH 0/2] Make sure 85xx bss doesn't start at 0x0

Wolfgang Denk wd at denx.de
Wed Oct 7 08:53:36 CEST 2009


Dear Peter Tyser,

In message <1254872619.24664.3159.camel at localhost.localdomain> you wrote:
>  
> > Right, that's the current situation.
> > 
> > My suggestion was NOT to put the bss  at  a  fixed  _offset_  to  the
> > U-Boot  image,  but to a fixed absolute address. My hope is that this
> > might simplify the linker scripts at the cost of adding a little code
> > to the relocation routine - for addresses in the bss we would have to
> > add a different relocation offset.
> 
> I think I see what you're getting at.  If we have a bss-specific fixup
> routine I don't give a hoot where the bss is located at link time.  Its
> just that that bss-aware fixup routine doesn't exist right now:)

Right!!! Now you got it. Ufff...

> It seems like a clean solution.  Adding a bss-aware fixup routine or
> putting the bss after the U-Boot image both seem good to me.  The
> bss-aware fixup routine has a clearer readelf output and slightly more
> complicated code while the bss-after-uboot change has a misleading
> readelf output and simpler code.  In any case I'd give a thumbs up to
> either of them.

My vote is for the first, because otherwise we will run into
situations again and again where users and/or the linker get confused
about overlapping sections and/or sections wrapping around the
physical end of address space.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
"Maintain an awareness for contribution --  to  your  schedule,  your
project, our company."                         - A Group of Employees


More information about the U-Boot mailing list