Dear Graeme Russ, In message <CALButCKfG+guStJP+M5E=nsr34vphzgbrebxquxd6028sw6...@mail.gmail.com> you wrote: > > > If SPL was to determing the relocation address, it would also have to > > read the environment, because there are a number of environment > > variables which can cause (dynamically) the relocation address to > > change. > > But this is not neccessarily the case for every board (or even every arch)
Not neccessarily, but possible. > For those boards/arches which CAN calculate the relocation address (either > because it is fixed do to npn-variable RAM size, or fixed in relation to > the maximum RAM address) why should we prohibit a method of skipping the > redundant copy operation in a way which is 100% transparent to everyone > else? Can we please focus on unifying the boot process first, before we try to come up with micro-optimizations? Most of the people who complain here that they need to skip relocation are probably wrong in at least two accounts: - They are not actually talking about relocation at all. - They don't base their accessment on any real, measured timings, or otherwise they would start optimizing completely different areas of the code. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de What's the sound a name makes when it's dropped? _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
