On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 09:10:26AM -0800, Sören Brinkmann wrote: > On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 04:07PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote: > > On 03/02/2015 03:23 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 09:24:45AM +0100, Michal Simek wrote: > > >> On 03/02/2015 08:32 AM, Michal Simek wrote: > > >>> On 02/27/2015 06:13 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > > >>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 09:02:09AM +0100, Michal Simek wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Add basic Xilinx ZynqMP arm64 support. > > >>>>> Serial and SD is supported. > > >>>>> It supports emulation platfrom ep108 and QEMU. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <[email protected]> > > >>>> [snip] > > >>>>> +/* Miscellaneous configurable options */ > > >>>>> +#define CONFIG_SYS_LOAD_ADDR 0x8000000 > > >>>>> + > > >>>>> +/* Initial environment variables */ > > >>>>> +#define CONFIG_EXTRA_ENV_SETTINGS \ > > >>>>> + "ethaddr=00:0a:35:00:01:22\0" \ > > >>>> > > >>>> No, you can't hard-code an ethaddr in. > > >>> > > >>> ah yeah. > > >>> > > >>>> > > >>>>> + "kernel_addr=0x200000\0" \ > > >>>>> + "initrd_addr=0xa00000\0" \ > > >>>>> + "initrd_size=0x2000000\0" \ > > >>>> > > >>>> These are really close together. And I imagine mirror the usual values > > >>>> on 32bit platforms. Maybe it's time to move them around a bit for more > > >>>> space? > > >>> > > >>> Currently I haven't had any problem with these values but I just don't > > >>> know > > >>> what will happen in future. > > > > > > Right. That's partly why I moved as much of the TI ARMv7 parts to the > > > Linux kernel defined limits a while back, people managed to bump into > > > overruns doing valid things. I'd really like to see things default to > > > something closer to the defined limits to start with and avoid those > > > kind of problems a few years down the line. 8MB is fine for now but I > > > can see people running over that and going "why does my initrd boot > > > fail". > > > > We will use FIT image and all these values won't be needed but > > they are need to be here. > > I have removed unused initrd_X in v2 because it is completely unused. > > Well, I haven't used FIT images so far and don't see why I should. Can we > please put the initrd at the highest address amongst kernel, DT and > initrd? The initrd is most prone grow. My current one is beyond 100MB. > Let's just spread things out, there should be enough memory for this.
Only along with doing bootm_size so that however data is passed in, we make sure it ends up (a) not overlapping and (b) where the kernel will see it. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
