[Top] [All Lists]

Re: RFC: Sentosa boot fix

To: Atsushi Nemoto <>
Subject: Re: RFC: Sentosa boot fix
From: Ralf Baechle <>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 15:18:42 +0000
In-reply-to: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <> <> <> <>
User-agent: Mutt/
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 11:45:37PM +0900, Atsushi Nemoto wrote:

> On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 18:47:12 +0000 (GMT), "Maciej W. Rozycki" 
> <> wrote:
> >  I have BUILD_ELF64 enabled for my SWARM configuration and I do not plan 
> > to change it.  If there is a bug in the definition of __pa_page_offset() 
> > for such a setup it should be fixed indeed.
> Though I do not object to remove "&& !defined(CONFIG_BUILD_ELF64)"
> from __pa_page_offset(), are there any point of CONFIG_BUILD_ELF64=y
> if your load address was CKSEG0?

Code in CKSEG0 allows shorter a shorter code sequence for address loads.
Yet some machines such as IP27 require 64-bit ELF for booting.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>