[U-Boot] [RFC PATCH 09/17] spl/85xx: new SPL support

[Tom Rini]

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 06:54:24PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 09/24/2012 06:51:40 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> >On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 07:01:19PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> >
> >> Update CONFIG_RAMBOOT and CONFIG_NAND_SPL references to accept
> >CONFIG_SPL
> >> and CONFIG_SPL_BUILD, respectively.  CONFIG_NAND_SPL can be
> >removed once
> >> the last mpc85xx nand_spl target is gone.
> >>
> >> CONFIG_RAMBOOT will need to remain for other use cases, but it
> >doesn't
> >> seem right to overload it for meaning SPL as well as nand_spl
> >does.  Even
> >> if it's somewhat appropriate for the main u-boot, the SPL itself
> >isn't
> >> (necessarily) ramboot, and we don't have separate configs for
> >SPL and
> >> main u-boot.  It was also inconsistent, as other platforms such as
> >> mpc83xx didn't use CONFIG_RAMBOOT in this way.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <scottwood at freescale.com>
> >> Cc: Andy Fleming <afleming at gmail.com>
> >[snip]
> >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc85xx/u-boot-spl.lds
> >b/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc85xx/u-boot-spl.lds
> >> new file mode 100644
> >> index 0000000..372195d
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc85xx/u-boot-spl.lds
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
> >[snip]
> >> +OUTPUT_ARCH(powerpc)
> >> +SECTIONS
> >
> >Can we add MEMORY declarations like (some) of the ARM linker
> >scripts do
> >so when we grow beyond the max size it's a link error?
> 
> It's already a linker error, because you get an overlap with the
> reset vector.

OK.  Then you can drop the CONFIG_SPL_MAX_SIZE you have later on since
that's where we check against it.  Or did I miss a user of it in the
series?

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20120924/cdd1fde0/attachment.pgp>