Hi Andre,
On 19 November 2016 at 09:35, André Przywara wrote:
> On 19/11/16 13:49, Simon Glass wrote:
>
> Hi Simon,
>
>> On 17 November 2016 at 18:50, André Przywara wrote:
>>> On 05/11/16 16:10, Simon Glass wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Simon,
>>>
On 2 November 2016 at 19:36, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>
On 19/11/16 13:49, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Simon,
> On 17 November 2016 at 18:50, André Przywara wrote:
>> On 05/11/16 16:10, Simon Glass wrote:
>>
>> Hi Simon,
>>
>>> On 2 November 2016 at 19:36, Andre Przywara wrote:
Read the specified "arch" value from a legacy or FIT U-Boot image and
>>>
Hi Andre,
On 17 November 2016 at 18:50, André Przywara wrote:
> On 05/11/16 16:10, Simon Glass wrote:
>
> Hi Simon,
>
>> On 2 November 2016 at 19:36, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>> Read the specified "arch" value from a legacy or FIT U-Boot image and
>>> store it in our SPL data structure.
>>> This a
On 05/11/16 16:10, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Simon,
> On 2 November 2016 at 19:36, Andre Przywara wrote:
>> Read the specified "arch" value from a legacy or FIT U-Boot image and
>> store it in our SPL data structure.
>> This allows loaders to take the target architecture in account for
>> custom loa
Hi Andre,
On 2 November 2016 at 19:36, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Read the specified "arch" value from a legacy or FIT U-Boot image and
> store it in our SPL data structure.
> This allows loaders to take the target architecture in account for
> custom loading procedures.
> Having the complete string
Read the specified "arch" value from a legacy or FIT U-Boot image and
store it in our SPL data structure.
This allows loaders to take the target architecture in account for
custom loading procedures.
Having the complete string -> arch mapping for FIT based images in the
SPL would be too big, so we
6 matches
Mail list logo