After increase the ROM_IMAGE_SIZE beyond 64K, Do you need to change
From: Eric W. Biederman [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Eric W.
Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2004 10:06 AM
To: Yinghai Lu
Cc: 'LinuxBIOS'; 'Ronald G. Minnich'; 'Richard Smith';
Subject: Re: Merge/Cleanup status
"Yinghai Lu" <yhlu(a)tyan.com> writes:
1. Using ROMCC to do propresser will help the size
Not directly. But it does cleanup the header files and increase
the exposure to romcc. There are a small handful of things
this make more maintainable.
2. what is usage for MOVNTI? It is for GDB....
Look at ramtest.c. movnti is a non-teporal move (bypasses the cache).
In some cases it can noticeably increase store performance. Last
I measured in the cases it mattered it increased store performance
3. How to use GDB to debug LinuxBIOS? Is it only for
Correct. Either an exception must be taken or a call to
needs to be made. At that point LinuxBIOS will stop and wait for
the debugger. Assuming CONFIG_GDB_STUB is compiled in. For details
on the gdb side, read up on the gdb remote serial protocol.
I'm not really a fan, I am still more productive with printf
debugging. But implement ion exception handling support is a general
win. And the support was easy to add.
4. You will use llshell for crt0.s or auto.c debug?
That is the idea. Again I added it because it is available. It would
not be hard to call out to it with an appropriate asm directive.
If people find llshell useful.
5. Current romcc only take constant parameters for non
inline function? It
There is something weird going on that affects the generated code, so
things don't work as smoothly as they should.
That said in theory function can be non-inline.
6. Anyone has tried to compile LinuxBIOS under Suse
9.1? what's the
recommended platform for LinuxBIOS compliation? It seems Suse 9.1 can not
compile Etherboot properly. I am always using RH9 to do the work. And just
found I can not compile LB for S2885, (size>65536), but I can do it in
The goal is to have LinuxBIOS compiling as many places as possible.
As for recommendations we can call out specific revisions of the
tool chain that are known good but I won't call out distros.
Size wise I know gcc-3.4 is about 2% better than gcc-3.3.
Interesting. On the purely size issue you can bump ROM_IMAGE_SIZE a
little and see if it the build works.
As for etherboot I don't know what your compile failure is. So I
don't know how to diagnose that.