On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:26:49 +0100, Albert ARIBAUD
wrote:
> Wolfgang and myself at least have already toched on the subject:
s/toched/touched/
Amicalement,
--
Albert.
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/
Hello DaveKucharczyk,
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 13:20:09 -0700 (MST), DaveKucharczyk
wrote:
> Old u-boot was u-boot-2009.08.
>
> I guess the main source of frustration the last 3 weeks could be attributed
> to my lack of experience with u-boot and the fact that we were working with
> an old Freescale
Hello DaveKucharczyk,
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 15:22:43 -0700 (MST), DaveKucharczyk
wrote:
> If I set CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE to start of RAM then I get no boot. Is there
> some kind of vector setup at the beginning of RAM?
Possibly. Why not use 0x7780 as mx53loco uses now? It's not like
the value
If I set CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE to start of RAM then I get no boot. Is there
some kind of vector setup at the beginning of RAM?
Have a good weekend everybody.
Cheers,
Dave
--
View this message in context:
http://u-boot.10912.n7.nabble.com/Memory-test-post-relocation-tp196088p196254.html
Sent f
Old u-boot was u-boot-2009.08.
I guess the main source of frustration the last 3 weeks could be attributed
to my lack of experience with u-boot and the fact that we were working with
an old Freescale version of u-boot. Not to mention 5 years worth of changes
between the versions. Most of the init
Albert ARIBAUD (U-Boot) wrote
> Still not sure what your config is. Can you indicate the board, commit
> and toolchain you're using?
We're using a board based on the Freescale mx53loco.
u-boot-2014.07
toolchain = armv7l-timesys-linux-gnueabi
Libc = ldd (GNU libc) 2.12
gcc = gcc (GCC) 4.4.7 201203
Hello DaveKucharczyk,
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 08:54:20 -0700 (MST), DaveKucharczyk
wrote:
> Albert ARIBAUD (U-Boot) wrote
> > No, that's not where it'll be; it'll relocate as high as it can.
>
> I guess that's the confusing part. When I run with debug on I get the
> following log. Halfway down it re
Hello DaveKucharczyk,
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 09:07:50 -0700 (MST), DaveKucharczyk
wrote:
> btw, I'm using nabble to post, but notice my code snippets don't show up in
> the mailing list, which I assume most of you guys are using.
Maybe it's just as well -- if you post full diffs, then our Patchwor
Dear DaveKucharczyk,
In message <1415974738890-196181.p...@n7.nabble.com> you wrote:
>
> If I set CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE to a low address then I can't run a memory
> test starting at the lowest address because that's where the U-Boot code
> will be.
If U-Boot is runnign from RAM there will always
btw, I'm using nabble to post, but notice my code snippets don't show up in
the mailing list, which I assume most of you guys are using.
--
View this message in context:
http://u-boot.10912.n7.nabble.com/Memory-test-post-relocation-tp196088p196197.html
Sent from the U-Boot mailing list archiv
Albert ARIBAUD (U-Boot) wrote
> No, that's not where it'll be; it'll relocate as high as it can.
I guess that's the confusing part. When I run with debug on I get the
following log. Halfway down it reports "Now running in RAM - U-Boot at:
eff89000", but there are still initcall's to lower memory a
Hello Dave,
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 07:18:58 -0700 (MST), DaveKucharczyk
wrote:
> Hi Albert,
> Thanks for the great information.
>
> Albert ARIBAUD (U-Boot) wrote
> > Baaad, bad. The first time you change something in your code, your
> > relocation offset might change and this will make U-Boot cras
Fabio Estevam-2 wrote
> You could boot the kernel and then run 'memtester' overnight utility
> for example.
Let's say that it has to run in U-Boot otherwise a test fixture would have
to be redesigned. Running it as early as possible, like in U-Boot, saves a
lot of time in the case of bad boards.
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:18 PM, DaveKucharczyk
wrote:
> Basically what is the best way to run the memory test? If I can run it
> before relocation then it would make things very simple.
You could boot the kernel and then run 'memtester' overnight utility
for example.
__
Hi Albert,
Thanks for the great information.
Albert ARIBAUD (U-Boot) wrote
> Baaad, bad. The first time you change something in your code, your
> relocation offset might change and this will make U-Boot crash and burn in
> interesting ways.
>
> Just define CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE to some low addres
Hello Dave,
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 15:19:20 -0700 (MST), DaveKucharczyk
wrote:
> We have 2GB’s of RAM starting at 0x7000 on our Freescale MX53
> based board.
>
> With old U-Boot we defined TEXT_BASE at the bottom of RAM at
> 0x7060 and CONFIG_SKIP_RELOCATE_UBOOT, presumably so that we can
We have 2GB’s of RAM starting at 0x7000 on our Freescale MX53 based
board.
With old U-Boot we defined TEXT_BASE at the bottom of RAM at 0x7060 and
CONFIG_SKIP_RELOCATE_UBOOT, presumably so that we can run memory tests all
the way to the top of RAM (this was brought over from the mx53loco
17 matches
Mail list logo
