nios2: use common sequence for reserve_uboot
PATCH 1/1 nios2: use common sequence for reserve_uboot
Use common sequence for reserve_uboot, as the result is the same.
--- common/board_f.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
common/board_f.c +2 -2
@@ -894,7 +894,7 @@ static init_fnc_t init_sequence_f[] = {* - board info struct */ setup_dest_addr, -#if defined(CONFIG_BLACKFIN ) || defined(CONFIG_NIOS2 ) +#if defined(CONFIG_BLACKFIN )/* Blackfin u-boot monitor should be on top of the ram */ reserve_uboot,#endif
@@ -919,7 +919,7 @@ static init_fnc_t init_sequence_f[] = { !defined(CONFIG_BLACKFIN) && !defined(CONFIG_M68K) reserve_video,#endif -#if !defined(CONFIG_BLACKFIN ) && !defined(CONFIG_NIOS2 ) +#if !defined(CONFIG_BLACKFIN ) reserve_uboot,#endif #ifndef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD
Signature · 1 line
2.1.4
PATCH 1/1 nios2: use common sequence for reserve_uboot
Quoted 4 lines · Thomas Chou
Use common sequence for
reserve_uboot, as the result is the same.Signed-off-by Thomas Chou <[email protected]>
Shouldn't we just implement relocation properly ?
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
PATCH 1/1 nios2: use common sequence for reserve_uboot
Hi Marek,
Quoted 7 lines · Marek Vasut
Quoted 4 lines · Thomas Chou
Use common sequence for
reserve_uboot, as the result is the same.Signed-off-by Thomas Chou <[email protected]>Shouldn't we just implement relocation properly ?
This patch is not quite related to relocation. It just says that nios2 can use the same order (early or late) of init sequence about the reserve_uboot() call as most other archs. Only blackfin is special in this.
I did look into the relocation of nios2 a little. And realized that nios2 does not have the relative call instruction like ARM's "bl". It will be almost impossible to do relocation without support from compiler, eg, emulate the relative call. ><
Best regards,
Thomas
PATCH 1/1 nios2: use common sequence for reserve_uboot
Quoted 1 line · Thomas Chou
Hi Marek,
Hi,
Quoted 9 lines · Marek Vasut
Quoted 7 lines · Thomas Chou
Quoted 4 lines
Use common sequence for
reserve_uboot, as the result is the same.Signed-off-by Thomas Chou <[email protected]>Shouldn't we just implement relocation properly ?
Quoted 8 lines
This patch is not quite related to relocation. It just says that nios2 can use the same order (early or late) of init sequence about the
reserve_uboot()call as most other archs. Only blackfin is special in this.I did look into the relocation of nios2 a little. And realized that nios2 does not have the relative call instruction like ARM's "bl". It will be almost impossible to do relocation without support from compiler, eg, emulate the relative call. ><
Ccing Albert, so he can comment on this.
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
PATCH 1/1 nios2: use common sequence for reserve_uboot
In reply to Thomas ChouQuoted 8 lines · Thomas Chou
Use common sequence for
reserve_uboot, as the result is the same.Signed-off-by Thomas Chou <[email protected]>--- common/board_f.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Applied to u-boot-nios.
Quoted 23 lines
common/board_f.c +2
-2@@ -894,7 +894,7 @@ static init_fnc_t init_sequence_f[] = {* - board info struct */ setup_dest_addr, -#if defined(CONFIG_BLACKFIN ) || defined(CONFIG_NIOS2 ) +#if defined(CONFIG_BLACKFIN )/* Blackfin u-boot monitor should be on top of the ram */ reserve_uboot,#endif @@ -919,7 +919,7 @@ static init_fnc_t init_sequence_f[] = { !defined(CONFIG_BLACKFIN) && !defined(CONFIG_M68K) reserve_video,#endif -#if !defined(CONFIG_BLACKFIN ) && !defined(CONFIG_NIOS2 ) +#if !defined(CONFIG_BLACKFIN ) reserve_uboot,#endif #ifndef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD