Hi Stephen. On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Stephen Warren <swar...@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: > On 10/16/2012 04:09 PM, Lucas Stach wrote: >> Am Dienstag, den 16.10.2012, 15:50 -0600 schrieb Stephen Warren: >>> From: Stephen Warren <swar...@nvidia.com> >>> >>> The SPL has grown. Increase CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE so SPL's BSS does not >>> overlap the main U-Boot. >> >> Is there any specific reason why the SPL is now bigger than before? Or >> is this just because of the general U-Boot rework (like serial multi >> anywhere)? And by how much has it grown? This is really more out of >> curiosity rather than any real objection. > > Looking at this more, I built commit cca6076 "tegra20: Remove armv4t > build flags" which was the last patch in the series that enabled SPL on > Tegra, and it overflows even there: > > Configuring for ventana board... > text data bss dec hex filename > 226085 4384 274228 504697 7b379 ./u-boot > 13857 153 4516 18526 485e ./spl/u-boot-spl > > u-boot/master currently has: > > Configuring for ventana board... > text data bss dec hex filename > 233579 4432 274368 512379 7d17b ./u-boot > 14382 201 4520 19103 4a9f ./spl/u-boot-spl > > So, there is slight growth, but mainly I think we've just been getting > lucky. > > Also, the overflow might possibly only have been exposed by the recent > serial rework; when I found the problem the serial rework caused on > Tegra, Allen mentioned that the missing BSS clearing hadn't been a > problem before since no global variables were used, but the serial > rework caused some to be.
To ask the opposite question, is it worth increasing by a whole 16KB so that the base address of U-Boot is a more aligned number? Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
