On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 09:40:15 +0800
"tiejun.chen" [off-list ref] wrote:

Scott Wood wrote:

quoted

On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 09:58:41 +0800
"tiejun.chen" [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Scott Wood wrote:

quoted

The guest OS *is* the same as native Linux, as far as TLB handling is
concerned.

Looks you means the TLB exception handler should be same between the native and
the guest OS. Right?

Yes.

I don't think so. The HY should assist the guest OS on MMU since I already point
the guest OS have no authority to create a real TLB directly as I previously said.

Of course the hypervisor assists, when a trap is taken.  That doesn't
mean the code is any different in the guest.

quoted

Yes, of course.  But that's not the point.  I was just using it as a
convenient example because that's what I've recently done ELF loading
with...  There's no reason U-Boot couldn't do the same if its ELF
loader were updated to support device trees.  Currently U-Boot loads
bootwrapperless uImages to physical address zero.

I never doubt the U-boot can do this for uImage. But I think we're always
talking about vmlinux, a bare Image.

uImage is pretty much a bare image.  It just has a header with a
checksum and some info like OS/architecture, kernel version, build
date, etc.

There would be *no* problem doing this with vmlinux in U-Boot if
someone put in the code to pass a device tree.

-Scott