On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Myles Watson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 2:54 PM, ron minnich <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Myles Watson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On 24.04.2009 22:16, Myles Watson wrote: >>>>> Are we going to move the location of the master header? I'd like to >>>>> add an error to cbfstool when it overwrites code with its data. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Why do I have the feeling that every mistake we made with LAR is >>>> repeated with CBFS? One year from now CBFS and LAR will probably have >>>> evolved to an identical feature set and the same design, have equally >>>> complex code and it will be a nightmare to debug corner cases in each of >>>> them. >>> >>> I didn't think we'd run into this one in LAR. How did we fix it? >>> > ../src/southbridge/nvidia/ck804/romstrap.lds: . = (_ROMBASE + > ROM_IMAGE_SIZE - 0x10) - (__romstrap_end - __romstrap_start); > ../src/southbridge/nvidia/mcp55/romstrap.lds: . = (_ROMBASE + > ROM_IMAGE_SIZE - 0x10) - (__romstrap_end - __romstrap_start); > ../src/southbridge/sis/sis966/romstrap.lds: . = (_ROMBASE + > ROM_IMAGE_SIZE - 0x10) - (__romstrap_end - __romstrap_start); > ../src/southbridge/via/k8t890/romstrap.lds: . = (_ROMBASE + > ROM_IMAGE_SIZE - 0x2c) - (__romstrap_end - __romstrap_start); > > These are all close to the end. CBFS gives us more room in flash > because elfboot is gone, so I say: > > 1. lets pick something safe for these boards > 2. Make the tool more aware > 3. Document it
if we put the romstrap in cbfs, then this is another bit of ldscript we can remove. Another plus. ron -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
