[coreboot] [PATCH]clean up bootblocksize handling in cbfstool, kconfig
mylesgw at gmail.com
Thu Nov 12 19:44:09 CET 2009
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Patrick Georgi
<patrick.georgi at coresystems.de> wrote:
> Am 12.11.2009 19:13, schrieb Myles Watson:
>> This patch saves 28K on my s2895, and 55K on qemu. Anybody have a
>> strong objection to that? Are we trying to have bootblock size be
>> constant for each board? Does it mess up future plans for backwards
> Having a good automatic way to minimize the bootblock size is very useful.
> As for backwards compatibility, what do you mean - updates? The bootblock
> complicates any attempt to do safe updates currently. This change won't
> improve it, but it won't make it worse.
I thought that the master CBFS header was directly above the
bootblock. If someone wanted to just update the bootblock, but the
size increased, there would be no way to do that. I realize that it's
impossible now, but it seems like that was a future plan at some
>> It uses an alignment of 256 bytes. Is that sufficient? Is it necessary?
> Should be fine.
> My only issue is that I don't know if its behaviour is stable. ld prefers to
> work from bottom to top in the address space and this solution might
> How can we get an "official" statement if this method is supported or just
> luck that it works right now? A mail to the binutils list?
More information about the coreboot