Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]?
Mark Millard via freebsd-arm <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.freebsd.devel.arm |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 2020-Oct-11, at 13:29, Klaus Cucinauomo <[email protected]> wrote: > Am 11.10.2020 um 22:21 schrieb Mark Millard <[email protected]>: >> >> It was about why something like "device_tree_address=0x4000" is >> needed when something like armstub8-gic.bin is in use. >> ....the naming conventions involved in finding armstub*.bin'sallow the file to be renamed in order to not be found,instead ofhaving to delete the file. > > > As also Rob proved in a previous post afaik, > The latest rpi-FW is bootable even if the complete device_tree_address -line is DELETED :-) Ha Ha > or to say : outcommented, if you like that more… My message that you misreplied to reported an example where that did not work and what is happening when it did not work. Rob proved that it does not always fail. He did not prove that the mechanism involved generally or always works when device_tree_address is left unset. === Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com ( dsl-only.net went away in early 2018-Mar) _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"