[U-Boot] [PATCH] Makefile: use u-boot.map for binary_size_check

[Chris Packham]

Hi Wolfgang, Tom,

On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 1:50 AM, Tom Rini <trini at ti.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 10:31:14AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>> Dear Chris Packham,
>>
>> In message <1406179627-9496-1-git-send-email-judge.packham at gmail.com> you wrote:
>> > u-boot.map is generated automatically by the compiler and more
>> > importantly can handle addresses >4GB.
>> ...
>> > > I think it should be possible to change binary_size_check to use
>> > > u-boot.map instead of System.map but would that be OK for all
>> > > architectures?
>> ...
>> > Something like this works for me but maybe there is a way to get nm to handle
>> > addresses >4GB.
>> ...
>> > +   map_size=$(shell cat u-boot.map | \
>> >             awk '/_image_copy_start/ {start = $$1} /_image_binary_end/ {end = $$1} END {if (start != "" && end != "") print "ibase=16; " toupper(end) " - " toupper(start)}' \
>> > +           | sed 's/0X//g' \
>>
>>
>> Do we _really_ need all of this?
>>
>> This looks very much like creaping featurism to me...

Do we need it? Maybe not I'd defer that judgement to you.

My problem is binary_size_check is on by default and my particular
platform (an out of tree ARM board) fails to build because of it. If
there was a way of opting out I'd happily use it.

>
> So it's a safetey check.  The various linker script clean-ups we've been
> doing have introduced a problem from time to time and binary_check_size
> gives a sanity check.  This just fixes a corner case in the test.

I wouldn't say this is a corner case. Certainly for the ARM target I'm
building it is unusual but I know plenty of powerpc boards would hit
the same problem becuase they have a jump instruction at the top of
their address space.

>
> --
> Tom