[coreboot] [PATCH] clean up bootblocksize handling in cbfstool, kconfig

Maciej Pijanka maciej.pijanka at gmail.com
Tue Nov 24 15:34:28 CET 2009

On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Patrick Georgi 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
>> compatibility?
> 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.
>> 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 interfere.
> 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?

Anyone tried to confirm if this method is supported or not?

Maciej Pijanka
reg. Linux user #133161

More information about the coreboot mailing list