[coreboot] SimNOW V2 LAB problem
Marc Karasek
Marc.Karasek at Sun.COM
Fri May 9 18:58:24 CEST 2008
I do know about the .id failure.
This has to do with where the .id section is being placed in the rom
image. For some reason, I never found out why, you need to put it at
0xFFFFE000 or lower. Any address from there to the top fails with the
.id message.
I really do not like toolchain problems..
We should standardize on a set toolchain. Maybe using the buildroot
tool to build a toolchain we can then use to build coreboot. Having
something that is a "standard" would help with these issues...
Marc
*********************
Marc Karasek
MTS
Sun Microsystems
mailto:marc.karasek at sun.com
ph:770.360.6415
*********************
Myles Watson wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Marc.Karasek at Sun.COM [mailto:Marc.Karasek at Sun.COM]
>> Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 10:34 AM
>> To: Jordan Crouse
>> Cc: Myles Watson; coreboot at coreboot.org
>> Subject: Re: SimNOW V2 LAB problem
>>
>> Good News I just tried coreboot-v3 with the same system and it does
>> compile...
>>
>
> Yes. It's weird. I can even compile v2 with an identical toolchain
> (release versions) on my x86_64 box.
>
> Here's the original thread.
>
> http://coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/2008-February/029993.html
>
> Thanks,
> Myles
>
>
>> *********************
>>
>
>
>> Marc Karasek
>> MTS
>> Sun Microsystems
>> mailto:marc.karasek at sun.com
>> ph:770.360.6415
>> *********************
>>
>>
>>
>> Jordan Crouse wrote:
>>
>>> On 09/05/08 11:41 -0400, Marc Karasek wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Jordan,
>>>>
>>>> I d/l buildrom to my notebook to build a 32bit version to try it with
>>>> SimNOW. It compiles but gets a linker error :
>>>> <coreboot: section `.ram' can't be allocated in segment 0>
>>>> Any thoughts on what could be causing this???
>>>>
>>>>
>>> This is from coreboot itself? That sounds really evil.
>>> We clearly have some major toolchain churn here.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Marc
>>>>
>>>> *********************
>>>> Marc Karasek
>>>> MTS
>>>> Sun Microsystems
>>>> mailto:marc.karasek at sun.com
>>>> ph:770.360.6415
>>>> *********************
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jordan Crouse wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 08/05/08 20:32 -0400, Ward Vandewege wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 03:52:21PM -0600, Myles Watson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Disregard my feeble wanderings.. I was thinking about my attempt
>>>>>>>>
>> to
>>
>>>>>>>> move busybox to 1.10.1 and the problems I was seeing there.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think though the two are related. Seems that uClibc 0.9.29 no
>>>>>>>>
>> longer
>>
>>>>>>>> supports the toolchain wrappers for -nostdlib and forcing a linking
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>> native tools (gcc/binutils) and a compiled uClibc library. This
>>>>>>>>
>> was
>>
>>>>>>>> pulled in 0.9.22 according to the uclibc FAQ. Maybe it was just a
>>>>>>>>
>> one
>>
>>>>>>>> off that FC5 still worked.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Strange. It worked for 0.9.28 as well. Those are the two versions
>>>>>>>
>> I've
>>
>>>>>>> used in buildrom.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ward: You've used lab haven't you? What toolchain do you use?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yep, I've got LAB systems running. I build on gNewsense deltad
>>>>>>
>> typically,
>>
>>>>>> which is basically Ubuntu Dapper, 32 bit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> It might be time for us to ping the uClibc / busybox teams for some
>>>>> guidance.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jordan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
>
>
More information about the coreboot
mailing list