[U-Boot] ARM: Incorrect ROM protection range?

[Albert ARIBAUD]

Hi Po-Yu Chuang,

Le 25/02/2011 03:41, Po-Yu Chuang a écrit :
> Dear Wolfgang and Albert,
>
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 4:17 AM, Wolfgang Denk<wd at denx.de>  wrote:
>> Dear Albert ARIBAUD,
>>
>> In message<4D66A7CD.9020309 at free.fr>  you wrote:
>>>
>>>> As far as I can tell, arch/powerpc/lib/board.c ,
>>>> arch/avr32/lib/board.c and examples/standalone/stubs.c actually all
>>>> mean __bss_end, as well as all the start.S files, so this seems to be
>>>> consistently used at least.
>>>
>>> I'd come to the same conclusion on my side. However you don't say how
>>> you would like the change to be done. Would a single commit for renaming
>>> _end into _bss_end and then creating _end after .dynsym be ok for you?
>>
>> Ah, sorry.
>>
>> Well, these are two logically separate things: the first is just a
>> renamer that should basicly result in the very same images built on
>> all systems (which can easily be verified semi-automatically).  The
>> second step would be adding _end at the end of the used data area (end
>> of .dynsym) on ARM only.
>
> I don't have the environment to build other platforms, so... does any
> of you please to provide such patches?

I suggest you do the changes for all of U-Boot and test them on your 
specific board, then submit the patchset and Cc: all architecture 
custodians, who will run tests on their respective architectures.

<http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/Patches> will give you all info on 
preparing and sending patches -- remember that's a two-patch set. IMO 
you don't necessarily need a cover letter as long as each patch has a 
clear commit message.

<http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/Custodians> will give you the list of 
all custodians; you can pick the architecture ones there.

All this, of course, if Wolfgang agrees to this suggestion.

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.