Le 30/11/2010 09:28, Andreas Bießmann a écrit : >>> + beq clear_bss /* skip relocation */ >>> + mov r1, r6 >> >> Why use r1? > > Use a scratch register here cause stmia Rn! does increment Rn.
> Therefore usage of r6 here would destroy the saved 'addr of > destination'. Cause that fact we have saved the 'addr of destination' @ > beginning of relocate_code twice, once to r6 and once to r7. This is > obviously not needed iv we change the register in copy_loop (which was > already used in comment .. if you saw that on the end of the line). Understood. > I doubt if this a 'speed up' but we can have a cleaner interface. We > have r4, r5, r6 as storage of input values to relocate_code. We do only > use scratch registers for copy_loop, fixloop for relocation, clear_bss > later on. We do decide if we need fixloop for relocation or if we can > skip that and then setup the relevant scratch registers. > > Well this is only an RFC. I found that plus the NULL pointer stuff worth > to mention. It is not that important to get this special patch in cause > the current implementation do also work. The r8 issue and the zero-filled reloc entry issue are important to pull in as they can cause all sorts of time-wasting issues. > regards > > Andreas Bießmann Amicalement, -- Albert. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
