Dear Albert ARIBAUD, In message <20130204151956.0c0e8486@lilith> you wrote: > > I actually like the new fix less, as it adds an API where there is no > need of one -- it's not like the implementation of BMP is at risk of > changing. What is the problem in fixing the load address at load time > and then passing this fixed address around?
Actually - why do we need a fix in the firtst place? Nothing prevents you to load an uImage, or a file system image, or an environment image, or ... or anything else to an address that does not meet the respectve alignment requirements. If you do, it doesn't work, but that is to be expected. Don't do it, then. I don't think we should try to prevent all possible stupid actions. [No _random_ signature today. :-) ] Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: [email protected] Am I your nanny? The kernel is there to support user programs, but it's a _resource_ handler, not a baby feeder. - Linus Torvalds in <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
