On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 04:42:51PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > > > > > Oops? This is expected and normal behaviour. Did anybody complain > > > about this?
It's hit me before when I foolishly try to load something at address zero -- why do we put u-boot at the end of RAM, and put up with the relocation weirdness, if not to allow loading things at zero? > > Real, any reason why? I understand on classic PPC this might be the > > case but I see no reason for it to be so on book-e parts. > > Well, one reason might be to have identical code for all PPC systems ? It's already 85xx-specific code. > > Any they are. I'm just removing a second relocation that is a hold > > over from how 6xx PPC exception vectors work. > > Not only 6xx. Actually all PPC. No, not all PPC. Book-E exceptions are different. -Scott ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
