[lkml]   [2012]   [Mar]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/3] Kbuild: Implement CONFIG_UIMAGE_KERNEL_NOLOAD
On 03/07/2012 11:36 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> On 11:40 Wed 07 Mar , Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 03/07/2012 11:08 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
>>> On 17:30 Tue 06 Mar , Stephen Warren wrote:
>>>> This allows the user to use U-Boot's mkimage's -T kernel_noload option
>>>> if their arch Kconfig allows it, and they desire.
>>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <>
>>>> ---
>>>> The next patch enables this new CONFIG_ALLOW_ option for ARM. I assume
>>>> that some other architectures will also be able to enable it, but I'm
>>>> not familiar enough with any to know which.
>>> I'm going to repeat. I don't think any impromevent here.
>>> with no specific kernel load address the uImage for is useless/
>> No, the whole point of this type of kernel image is that it doesn't need
>> a specific load address; the kernel zImage can run from anywhere in RAM
>> (provided AUTO_ZRELADDR is enabled, subject to some slight
>> restrictions), and hence the uImage doesn't need to be loaded to or
>> moved to any particular location.
>> The scripts that U-Boot runs determine where the image gets loaded into
>> memory.
> so instead of spending time on the uImage add simply the support the zImage to
> U-Boot as this AUTO_ZRELADDR have 0 advantage compare to the zImage

Thinking more about this, I guess the reliance on AUTO_ZRELADDR is wrong
here; Russell, Nico, is the ARM decompressor fully position-independent
irrespective of the AUTO_ZRELADDR setting. That setting just determines
where the decompressor writes its output, not what address the
decompressor can run at, right? So, this KERNEL_NOLOAD feature could be
enabled in all cases on ARM, not only when AUTO_ZRELADDR is enabled.

As such to address Jean-Christophe's most recent comment above, this
patch isn't about adding support for AUTO_ZRELADDR, but for U-Boot's
kernel_noload feature, so comparisons should be drawn between
kernel_noload uImages and zImage, not between AUTO_ZRELADDR and zImage.

In other words:

We already have and need ZRELADDR no matter what, for reasons unrelated
to U-Boot/uImage.

Patch 1 in this series is just consolidating duplicate definitions, and
doesn't introduce any new features, so I think hope you think it's a
good thing no matter what anyone thinks about U-Boot/uImage.

I assume you're only arguing about patches 2 and 3?

 \ /
  Last update: 2012-03-07 21:31    [W:0.079 / U:7.208 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site