Le 11/02/2011 07:57, Aneesh V a écrit : >> As you point out, using __u_boot_cmd would cause as much of a concern as >> the current use of __bss_start, so I see no improvement there. >> >> Please define a label in the linker file. If you haven't got time to >> port the change to other linkers, don't ; the BSS issue is, for now, >> specific to your case. > > I thought it rather unlikely that the position of __u_boot_cmd will > change in future. But I agree with you. Better do it cleanly once and > for all. Changing the linker scripts for all cpus should not be a big > deal. But I will not be able to test any of them except armv7/omap4 > > One patch will do, right?
Yes. > Also, any thoughts on the name for the new label. > _end_of_relocated_image is all I can think of? Current practice has "_end" appended to whatever the labels delimit -- same as for "_start". Besides, the "relocated" part would be inexact; what matters here is the loading, or copying, of the image, not its relocation (and actually BSS is kind-of-relocated, as references to BSS from text or data may be the target of a relocation record). So I would suggest "__image_load_end" or "__image_copy_end". >>> Best regards, >>> Aneesh Amicalement, -- Albert. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
