Thread (24 messages) flat view 24 messages, 9 authors, 2012-03-07

[PATCH 2/3] Kbuild: Implement CONFIG_UIMAGE_KERNEL_NOLOAD

From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <hidden>
Date: 2012-03-07 18:48:57
Also in: linux-arch, linux-kbuild, linux-sh, lkml, sparclinux

On 11:40 Wed 07 Mar     , Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/07/2012 11:08 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
quoted
On 17:30 Tue 06 Mar     , Stephen Warren wrote:
quoted
This allows the user to use U-Boot's mkimage's -T kernel_noload option
if their arch Kconfig allows it, and they desire.

Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <redacted>
---
The next patch enables this new CONFIG_ALLOW_ option for ARM. I assume
that some other architectures will also be able to enable it, but I'm
not familiar enough with any to know which.
I'm going to repeat. I don't think any impromevent here.

with no specific kernel load address the uImage for is useless/
No, the whole point of this type of kernel image is that it doesn't need
a specific load address; the kernel zImage can run from anywhere in RAM
(provided AUTO_ZRELADDR is enabled, subject to some slight
restrictions), and hence the uImage doesn't need to be loaded to or
moved to any particular location.

The scripts that U-Boot runs determine where the image gets loaded into
memory.
so instead of spending time on the uImage add simply the support the zImage to
U-Boot as this AUTO_ZRELADDR have 0 advantage compare to the zImage
quoted
And this no the job of the kernel to build a boot loader specific boot image
format.
Not everyone agrees with this.
so if a new boot loader apear or a new format the kernel will have to support
it. No
quoted
And the uImage format here is called the legacy format where now U-Boot
support a new format based on DT format.

Will you plan to add it too?
No. The last time I heard anyone talk about that, it sounded like the
adoption was basically zero, so it seems pointless. Personally, I find
creating that kind of image more complex, and don't see any benefits in
that format either.
quoted
no sorry I don't think it's the right way to go.

On X86 we boot zImage simply. The new uImage option to do not specify the load
address add nothing more than just boot a zImage for kernel point of view.
U-Boot does not currently have the ability to boot zImage on ARM.
so add it and drop the uImage format
quoted
Further more on server the vendor will use grub mostly (even on ARM) and will
expect to boot a zImage.
But that is irrelevant for the people who are using U-Boot not grub.
execpt the zIamge is the common boot format for all the server and PC and
other boot loader

Best Regards,
J.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help