On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 3:09 AM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 15.10.2008 04:54, ron minnich wrote: >> return (void *) CONFIG_RAM_STACK_LOCATION; >> >> not quite right? CONFIG_RAM_STACK_LOCATION; + CONFIG_RAM_STACK_SIZE -4? >> > > Actually, that was intentional. You see, we haven't decided on the > meaning of the RAM_STACK_LOCATION constant/variable yet. We could very > well declare it to be the initial %esp for RAM stacks. Then again, we > could also decide that the stack shall be at the top of available RAM, > and that would require us to use a variable. > > You supply the meaning of the variable, I'll make sure the code matches. >
let's call it RAM_TOP_OF_STACK and put it at the standard 88ffc ron -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
