On 02/04/13 23:02, Jeroen Hofstee wrote: > Hello Wolfgang, > > On 02/04/2013 09:35 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: >> Dear Nikita Kiryanov, >> >> In message <[email protected]> you wrote: >>> I did mention that I consider that fix as temporary. I believe this fix >>> is better because it addresses the issue everywhere and does so in a >>> more maintainable way (does not require the address fix to be duplicated >>> everywhere there is a problem). >> Can you please explain (again) what exactly you consider the problem? >> >> That I can load a BMP image to anodd address, and that this will >> result in odd results? >> > If you use eldk 5.3, a board will be bricked if you set the load address > to not (an aligned address _+ 2_). So anyone who didn't know the +2 > requirement, has a bricked board (and can't recover). So this is > really a different then md trapping, since resetting the board won't > help... it is broken / kaput.
Agreed totally, by anyone we mean any _user_ that don't even need to care about the bmp header structure and uses the perfectly 32 bit aligned address. > > That said, I am not really in favor of this solution. But I do think it needs > to be fixed. I actually like the approach as it gives an abstraction for: 1) different compilers and their default options, 2) architecture specific "problems" like weather it can deal with unaligned accesses -- Regards, Igor. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
