2003-12-06 19:49:23 +00:00
|
|
|
Subject: Re: [PATCH][CFT] bring ARM memory layout in line with the documented behaviour
|
|
|
|
|
From: "Anders Larsen" <alarsen@rea.de>
|
|
|
|
|
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 14:15:21 +0200
|
|
|
|
|
To: Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...
|
|
|
|
|
>I still see references to _armboot_start, _armboot_end_data, and
|
|
|
|
|
>_armboot_end - which role do these play now? Can we get rid of them?
|
|
|
|
|
>
|
|
|
|
|
>How are they (should they be) set in your memory map above?
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-10-07 19:51:12 +00:00
|
|
|
_armboot_start contains the value of CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE (0xA07E0000); it seems
|
|
|
|
|
CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE and _armboot_start are both used for the same purpose in
|
2003-12-06 19:49:23 +00:00
|
|
|
different parts of the (ARM) code.
|
|
|
|
|
Furthermore, the startup code (cpu/<arm>/start.S) internally uses
|
|
|
|
|
another variable (_TEXT_BASE) with the same content as _armboot_start.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree that this mess should be cleaned up.
|
