[microblaze-uclinux] uclinux boots using the image stored in FLASH!!

[anand_12 <anand_12@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi all


  Thanks once again to all help from these two lists,we crossed another milestone today.Our board(uclinux+microblaze(spartan 2E)) now is fully and completely a self booting machine on the network..we have the image(kernel + apps) in FLASH and the FPGA configuration stored in the PROM...

 on reset, the FPGA is configured with the bitstream and the processor starts executing from address 0x00000000 which is where we have our rather simple bootloader(downloaded along with bitstream) that copies the image from FLASH to SDRAM and then jumps to the starting address of the RAM...

 the kernel then sets up the networking,mounts file systems etc..and gives the prompt..

 so thats where it stands as of now..a doubt still exists though regarding the MTD partitions :

cat /proc/mtd yields :

/bin> cat /proc/mtd
dev:    size   erasesize  name
mtd0: 0003d000 00001000 "RAM"
mtd1: 00020000 00004000 "Bootloader"
mtd2: 00020000 00020000 "Bootargs"
mtd3: 00020000 00020000 "MAC"
mtd4: 00080000 00020000 "Config"
mtd5: 00020000 00020000 "Spare"
mtd6: 00200000 00020000 "Image"
mtd7: 00500000 00020000 "JFFS2"
mtd8: 00800000 00020000 "Flash"
mtd9: 0003d000 00001000 "Romfs"
/bin> 

we have 8MB flash -> mtd1+....mtd7
        mtd0,mtd9 -> ??
       mtd8 -> i suppose gives the possibility of erasing 
               the entire chip in one single shot..contents 
               i mean..:-)..??



 I want to know more about what these 'mtd0' and 'mtd9' partitions are...are they something like logical partitions not really existing on the FLASH chip?..their size(size column above) keeps changing(they are always equal though)..why is that?..

 moreover..we were going wrong here...as you might have seen in my earlier postings..we were computing the starting address of /dev/mtd6 by simply adding to the FLASH BASE ADDR
the sizes of the first five(0-5) partitions..but we figured out today that mtd0 does not contribute to the size actually....so in our case to we just had to add sizeof(mtd[1-5]) to the base address and things worked well...i might be getting the logic entirely wrong..please
clarify if this is the case...!!...

 any clarifications are welcome...thanks in advance


Cheers

V.Anand
(www.tenet.res.in)











****************************************


_______________________________________________
uClinux-dev mailing list
uClinux-dev@uclinux.org
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev
This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org

****************************************


___________________________
microblaze-uclinux mailing list
microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au
Project Home Page : http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~jwilliams/mblaze-uclinux
Mailing List Archive : http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~listarch/microblaze-uclinux/