On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 10:01:50PM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Tom Rini, > > In message > <CA+M6bXkBodKLkkqFseqo=benul62w-musgsteygv4wlevf1...@mail.gmail.com> you > wrote: > > > > > I don't consider it a big problem (just a bit sad) if ELDK 4.2 cannot > > > be used for building these. However, I think it is not acceptable > > > tobuild known-to-be-broken images. If the tool chain is too old, this > > > shall result in a clear error message and abort of the build. > > > > Is an #error in a common omap4/5 file sufficient or does it need to be > > sooner than that? > > If it can be tested there, it can probably also tested before we start > building at all?
I suspect no just because the kernel does this in <linux/compiler-gcc[45].h> > > > Why is thumb mode needed for these boards? Just because of image > > > size? > > > > Basically, yes. Without thumb mode we're very close (and sometimes > > spilling over) the size limit. Thumb takes us away from that and is a > > small speed increase (due to smaller sized files). > > size limit means size limit for the SPL due to limitations of the ROM > boot loader resp. the available RAM size? On OMAP4 we have (after a quick peek around) 56KB SRAM but we only have 40KB of that as non-secure SRAM for use by SPL. -- Tom _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
