>
> Scott Wood <scottw...@freescale.com> wrote on 2010/11/23 23:32:04:
> >
> > On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 23:14:06 +0100
> > Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernl...@transmode.se> wrote:
> >
> > > Scott Wood <scottw...@freescale.com> wrote on 2010/11/23 22:20:58:
> > > > "load address" being pre-relocation? Currently these must be equal
> > > > (which doesn't seem particularly burdensome).
> > >
> > > Yes, but in our case we update the boot in the field and we want to
> > > make that safer by having two uboot areas but we don't want to carry
> > > around
> > > two u-boot images.
> >
> > How about playing with BATs before entering C code, so that the image
> > always appears at the same effective address?
>
> hmm, never thought of that. The extra bonus would be that LINK_OFF should
> not be needed either.
After sleeping on it I realize that all direct accesses to the flash
such as getting the env. will need to be adjusted instead.
Jocke
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
