Re: More walnut boottime "fun"

On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 05:07:54AM -0700, Matt Porter wrote:

On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 10:17:28PM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:

quoted

[...]

That said, the two stage relocator is "The Right Thing To Do(tm)".
It only needs to be two stage, though when the load point > -Ttext.

	I have fixed the relocate code so it does it in 2 stages ...
first it moves the relocate code, then it relocates the image, either
start first or end first, so it doesn't overwrite itself.

	The code is a bit verbose, but I guess size isn't really an issue
for the boot code.

Why doesn't walnut simply call mktree with the option to load at
it's -Ttext to avoid the original problem?  That's why I added the
parameter to mktree and use it on the Spruce build...no need to
do an extra copy if we control the load point.

	That would be too easy ;)  Besides, I had pretty much finished
the code when I got this email (would have finished it last night, except
that 'mtcr' and 'mtctr' are apparently both valid instructions ;(

	Simon

--
Simon Winwood
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 06:18:57AM +1100, Simon Winwood wrote:

On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 05:07:54AM -0700, Matt Porter wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 10:17:28PM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:

quoted

[...]

quoted

That said, the two stage relocator is "The Right Thing To Do(tm)".
It only needs to be two stage, though when the load point > -Ttext.

	I have fixed the relocate code so it does it in 2 stages ...
first it moves the relocate code, then it relocates the image, either
start first or end first, so it doesn't overwrite itself.

Yay.  I was just about to start on that now that I fixed the minor
things upsetting my rpx.  I'll go and test this around and commit it or
something similar today hopefully.

--
Tom Rini (TR1265)
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/