Steve Chen <[email protected]> writes: > On Wed, 2009-01-21 at 15:12 +0300, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > >> > >> > - We (or at least *I*) had no desire to have the same kernel binary >> > run on both a da8xx and a davinci. So, cutting out the davinci >> > runtime code & data that was wasting memory was "A Good Thing (tm)". >> > >> >> Kevin seems the only person interested in ahving the same kernel >> binary, not clear why though... >> > > Personally, I would love to see single binary that is capable of running > on all DaVinci + OMAPLx/DA8xx EVMs. It really does make testing > integration much easier.
Phew, so I'm not completely alone. ;) > I also believe that it is worth the extra efforts. However, I also > find that not able to have a usable uImage for DA8xx very difficult > to swallow. Actually, that is the only real sticking point for me. > I'll investigate how to get around this problem when time permits. I agree, I don't like that option very much either. But that being the most significant issue, I think between us we can figure out something that will work. If nothing else, a simple patch to the da8xx uboot to replace any load addresss that start with 0x8xxxxxx with 0xcxxxxxx should work just fine, since the 0x8xxxxxxx region is obviously not a place where an image could be loaded anyways. BTW, did you try my idea of manually loading a zImage linked at 0x8xxxxxxx on the da8xx at 0xCxxxxxx? I'm pretty sure that should work. If so, then my u-boot hack idea would work as well. Kevin _______________________________________________ Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list [email protected] http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source
