Hi Benoît, On Sat, 16 Feb 2013 20:54:01 +0100 (CET), Benoît Thébaudeau <benoit.thebaud...@advansee.com> wrote:
> Hi Albert, > > On Saturday, February 16, 2013 7:47:13 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > > Hi Benoît, > > > > On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 21:54:17 +0100, Benoît Thébaudeau > > <benoit.thebaud...@advansee.com> wrote: > > > > > Use __image_copy_end instead of __bss_start for the end of the image to > > > relocate. This is the same as commit 033ca72, but applied to all ARM > > > start.S. > > > > What is the benefit of this? I find it more logical for BSS-related > > code to use a BSS-related symbol than an image-copy related symbol. > > I don't see why you are talking about BSS-related code. This piece of code is > just supposed to copy the text and rodata from the source image to its > destination location, before optionally relocating its symbols. BSS has > nothing > to do with this, so I find this image-copy symbol more appropriate here. > > But besides the naming, the benefit is also that some linker scripts put some > stuff (e.g. MMU tables used early before jumping to relocated code, or > relocation info) between this __image_copy_end and __bss_start, that does not > have to be copied or relocated, so this patch saves a useless data copy in > that > case. Apologies -- this is indeed copy-related, not BSS-related, code, and thus the image-copy related symbol is apt, and your additional note makes it all the more valid. > Best regards, > Benoît Amicalement, -- Albert. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
