Dear Wolfgang Denk,

> Dear Graeme Russ,
> 
> In message <CALButCLDyKZnsZqGXhxcu-
uev9nysg77f1xwauvmgb9gc7b...@mail.gmail.com> you wrote:
> > While we are on the subject - Do either of you think support for the x86
> > zimage/bzImage format should end up here in common code? Not that the x86
> 
> The common coe should be architecture-neutral.  It might cann
> architecture-specific routines, which may (or may not) get added
> later, depending if somebody cares about adding such support.
> 
> > (b)zImage header is unique (see arch/x86/include/asm/bootparam.h) and
> > decompressing vmlinux out of an x86 (b)zImage is non-trivial given the
> > header and decompression stub
> 
> I have to admit that I never understood the fuzz about being able to
> boot zImages.  I see more disadvanatges than advantages for this, but
> some ARM people go frenzy when this topic pops up - see recent
> discussions about removal of uImage support on the AKML.

Sure, but let's try to offer them a compromise. Everyone will be happy that way 
at least to some extent.

> 
> Frankly: I see no benefit in adding x86 support.
> 
> I see no benefit in adding ARM support either, but YMMV...
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Wolfgang Denk

Best regards,
Marek Vasut
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Reply via email to