From 3f2546b2ef55b661fd8dd69682b38992225e86f6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: fishsoupisgood Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 01:17:54 +0100 Subject: Initial import of qemu-2.4.1 --- roms/u-boot/doc/README.ARM-memory-map | 17 +++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+) create mode 100644 roms/u-boot/doc/README.ARM-memory-map (limited to 'roms/u-boot/doc/README.ARM-memory-map') diff --git a/roms/u-boot/doc/README.ARM-memory-map b/roms/u-boot/doc/README.ARM-memory-map new file mode 100644 index 00000000..1b120ac3 --- /dev/null +++ b/roms/u-boot/doc/README.ARM-memory-map @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +Subject: Re: [PATCH][CFT] bring ARM memory layout in line with the documented behaviour +From: "Anders Larsen" +Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 14:15:21 +0200 +To: Wolfgang Denk + +... +>I still see references to _armboot_start, _armboot_end_data, and +>_armboot_end - which role do these play now? Can we get rid of them? +> +>How are they (should they be) set in your memory map above? + +_armboot_start contains the value of CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE (0xA07E0000); it seems +CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE and _armboot_start are both used for the same purpose in +different parts of the (ARM) code. +Furthermore, the startup code (cpu//start.S) internally uses +another variable (_TEXT_BASE) with the same content as _armboot_start. +I agree that this mess should be cleaned up. -- cgit v1.2.3