From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from www.webware-experts.de ([80.78.166.106]) by casper.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1T9Ekz-0007rr-4g for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 12:30:57 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by www.webware-experts.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D6E71B69A31 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 14:30:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from www.webware-experts.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (webwarexs.private [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DcDbe7XXCE2X for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 14:30:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.3.131] (p57bb9106.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [87.187.145.6]) by www.webware-experts.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 12AFE1B69A26 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 14:30:50 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <504745F8.604@webware-experts.de> Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 14:30:48 +0200 From: Norbert Roos MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <50462CE6.10607@webware-experts.de> <1346825557.3625.4.camel@lws-weitzel> <50471A79.6070707@webware-experts.de> <1346838098.3625.10.camel@lws-weitzel> <504722D8.1050409@webware-experts.de> <20120905105323.GE26594@pengutronix.de> <50473122.90906@webware-experts.de> <20120905111549.GG26594@pengutronix.de> In-Reply-To: <20120905111549.GG26594@pengutronix.de> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: barebox-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: MLO doesn't work, rest is ok To: barebox@lists.infradead.org On 09/05/2012 01:15 PM, Sascha Hauer wrote: > Maybe you could try an older toolchain. There are some dark memories in > my mind, but it could also be that my mind is fooling me... Ok, i will try this.. > The MLO is generated from barebox.bin with the omap_signGP tool. It > seems the header is 520byte in size. You could compare these between > both images. Both configuration headers are the same. > I don't know though if this is enough for the OMAP ROM code > to detect a valid image. Meanwhile, i took a look at the MLO. The configuration header is ok, the image size in the GP header is correct, and the loading address is the same like in the working MLO. The first instruction in the image differs from the working one (the others too, of course). So the MLO should at least get loaded and started.. strange. Norbert _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox