Descrepancies in bootcmd docs and boards

March 24, 2011, 11:35:39 PM

#0

smithsamuelm

smithsamuelm

Show smithsamuelm's last posts.

Show general stats for smithsamuelm.

Super Hero
Posts: 7

Descrepancies in bootcmd docs and boards

I have both a 9260S and 9260B board. I noticed a discrepancy in the docs between the bootcmd from the factory
on the 9260S board and what the docs say should be the bootcmd. Is this discrepancy a typo or is the RAM in a different location for the two models? The 9260B user manual agrees with the factory configuration.

9260S
U-Boot> printenv
...
bootcmd=nand read.jffs2 0x21000000 0x100000 0x200000; bootm 0x21000000

User Manual for 9260S
bootcmd=nand read.jffs2 0x21800000 0x100000 0x200000; bootm 0x21800000

9260B
U-Boot> printenv
...
bootcmd=nand read.jffs2 0x22000000 0x100000 0x200000; bootm 0x22000000

User Manual for 9260B
bootcmd=nand read.jffs2 0x22000000 0x100000 0x200000; bootm 0x22000000

March 25, 2011, 08:56:10 PM

#1

admin

admin

Show admin's last posts.

Show general stats for admin.

Administrator
Super Hero
Posts: 342

Re: Descrepancies in bootcmd docs and boards

The kernel image will decompress and relocate itself so the loading address is not important as long as there is enough space in memory that allows kernel to decompress and relocate.

March 26, 2011, 11:30:26 AM

#2

smithsamuelm

smithsamuelm

Show smithsamuelm's last posts.

Show general stats for smithsamuelm.

Super Hero
Posts: 7

Re: Descrepancies in bootcmd docs and boards

Is the SDRAM layout on these boards that same as the ED, that is, RAM start is at 0x20000000 ? with exception vectors

It would be nice if the docs included a full memory map. Just so one does not have to guess if its the same or different.