On Wednesday 19 March 2008 19:36, Andy Green wrote: > > -1 for writing our own bootloader I agree.
> > If U-boot is bloated and big, we should certainly look into why that's > > so and slim it down, but IMO we should avoid reinventing the wheel and > > stick with what works. I stripped down u-boot code to 96k (just to fit in the very first NAND page, so I don't care about NAND Errors (samsung told me that...)) and it has: serial support, nand support (ecc), mmc support with vfat support. that's it. No fancy LCD support, ethernet, or whatever. I think it is enough for a bootloader. It loads kernel from nand into ram, and jumps into it. All other init stuff is done at the kernel driver level, so I see no problem here... > Huh I grepped it and it seems U-Boot already has s3c6400 support, I > didn't realize. So don't re-invent the wheel... just my $.02... :^) -- Gianluca Renzi
