* Jonathan A. Kollasch <[email protected]> [110523 12:52]: > On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 12:25:37PM -0700, Stefan Reinauer wrote: > > On 5/22/11 8:39 AM, repository service wrote: > > >Author: jakllsch > > >Date: Sun May 22 17:39:25 2011 > > >New Revision: 6608 > > >URL: https://tracker.coreboot.org/trac/coreboot/changeset/6608 > > > > > >Log: > > >Ensure ck804 romstrap is 16-byte aligned. > > >This alignment seems to be necessary for the chip to recognize it. > > > > > >Signed-off-by: Jonathan Kollasch<[email protected]> > > >Acked-by: Jonathan Kollasch<[email protected]> > > > > > >Modified: > > > trunk/src/southbridge/nvidia/ck804/romstrap.inc > > > > > >Modified: trunk/src/southbridge/nvidia/ck804/romstrap.inc > > >============================================================================== > > >--- trunk/src/southbridge/nvidia/ck804/romstrap.inc Sun May 22 > > >00:18:59 2011 (r6607) > > >+++ trunk/src/southbridge/nvidia/ck804/romstrap.inc Sun May 22 > > >17:39:25 2011 (r6608) > > >@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ > > > .section ".romstrap", "a", @progbits > > > > > > > > >+ .align 4 > > Shouldn't this be .align 16 then? > > I've been told that I probably wanted .p2align or .balign, so as to > avoid the pitfalls of .align having different meanings on various > assemblers/architectures. > > Anyone have a preference for one or the other?
I believe we use .align everywhere else in the code, so I think we should stick to that. We can't compile coreboot for an a.out target anyways.. Stefan -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
