[PATCH v2] bootm: update os_entry from uimage
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
plagnioj at jcrosoft.com
Tue Sep 24 05:26:47 EDT 2013
On 16:54 Mon 23 Sep , Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 04:32:26PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > On 11:13 Mon 23 Sep , Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 10:16:00AM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > > > On 17:20 Sat 21 Sep , Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > > > > if not uimage set 0 by default
> > > > >
> > > > > today we do not see the issue as the kernel entry point is the same as the
> > > > > load_addr but on other binary its not necessary the case
> > > > >
> > > > > as today we ignore the entry point set in the uimage and just assume it's the
> > > > > same as the load_addr
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj at jcrosoft.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > this patch will also prepare to add a globalval and a getopt to overwrite the
> > > > os_entry
> > >
> > > We already have a getopt to overwrite the os_entry: -e
> > >
> > > >
> > > > yours do not care about this preparation by not setting
> > > > data.os_entry = UIMAGE_SOME_ADDRESS;
> > >
> > > Because UIMAGE_SOME_ADDRESS is not suitable for a relative offset to the
> > > image start.
> >
> > I use this ti let known th e uimage code that the os_entry is not overwrite
> > and that it must not modify it
> >
> > because if you specify via getopt or global and do not set UIMAGE_SOME_ADDRESS
> > the uimage code will overwrite the provided value
>
> So you have uImages which have the wrong entry point provided in the
> images? Why don't you fix the images instead?
flashed images we just update the booloader
Best Regards,
J.
>
> Sascha
>
> --
> Pengutronix e.K. | |
> Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
> Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
> Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
More information about the barebox
mailing list