On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 01:25:38PM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote: > Wolfgang Denk wrote: > > > Do you think this is an unreasonable request? A quick fix takes me > > less than it takes to write this email (see following patch). > > Fixing get_ram_size() is not a quick fix. We would need to implement a > temporary TLB mechanism for accessing memory above 2GB, and a machine check > handler for handling memory access to non-existent RAM.
Passing the actual, known size of RAM (why guess when we know?) as "maxsize" should eliminate the machine check problem[1] -- you'd just be using it as a not particularly exhaustive memory tester. I don't see why it should be mandatory. It also doesn't handle non-power-of-two sized memory -- don't rely on the value it returns. -Scott [1] It's worse than machine checks, what if some I/O device is mapped directly after RAM? IIRC people have run into this sort of problem doing this type of memory sizing on PCs. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
