Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 62/69] x86: Support a chained-boot development flow

2016-03-13 Thread Bin Meng
Hi Simon, On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Bin, > > On 11 March 2016 at 01:46, Bin Meng wrote: >> Hi Simon, >> >> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Simon Glass wrote: >>> Sometimes it is useful to jump into U-Boot directly from coreboot or UEFI >>> without any 16-bit init

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 62/69] x86: Support a chained-boot development flow

2016-03-11 Thread Simon Glass
Hi Bin, On 11 March 2016 at 01:46, Bin Meng wrote: > Hi Simon, > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Simon Glass wrote: >> Sometimes it is useful to jump into U-Boot directly from coreboot or UEFI >> without any 16-bit init. This can help during development by allowing U-Boot >> to avoid doing al

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 62/69] x86: Support a chained-boot development flow

2016-03-11 Thread Bin Meng
Hi Simon, On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Sometimes it is useful to jump into U-Boot directly from coreboot or UEFI > without any 16-bit init. This can help during development by allowing U-Boot > to avoid doing all the init required by the platform. I don't understand, why

[U-Boot] [PATCH 62/69] x86: Support a chained-boot development flow

2016-03-06 Thread Simon Glass
Sometimes it is useful to jump into U-Boot directly from coreboot or UEFI without any 16-bit init. This can help during development by allowing U-Boot to avoid doing all the init required by the platform. In this case we cannot rely on the GDT settings. U-Boot will hang or crash if these are wrong