From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Aneesh V <aneesh@ti.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 13:57:24 +0530
Subject: [U-Boot] BSS footprint of FAT very high - SPL issues
In-Reply-To: <4D54F03F.6070308@free.fr>
References: <4D4798E2.3050500@ti.com> <20110201075521.60484B187@gemini.denx.de>
	<4D47C1C9.1020002@ti.com> <20110201100312.241C1B187@gemini.denx.de>
	<4D495966.4010009@ti.com> <4D495E02.4080509@free.fr>
	<4D4963D6.3020505@ti.com> <4D4974DC.9010103@free.fr>
	<4D4A85C2.7070807@ti.com> <4D4CF506.5090902@free.fr>
	<4D54D704.3060508@ti.com> <4D54D985.7010609@free.fr>
	<4D54DDD7.7080507@ti.com> <4D54F03F.6070308@free.fr>
Message-ID: <4D54F2EC.8000302@ti.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On Friday 11 February 2011 01:45 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
[snip..]
>> Also, any thoughts on the name for the new label.
>> _end_of_relocated_image is all I can think of?
>
> Current practice has "_end" appended to whatever the labels delimit --
> same as for "_start".
>
> Besides, the "relocated" part would be inexact; what matters here is the
> loading, or copying, of the image, not its relocation (and actually BSS
> is kind-of-relocated, as references to BSS from text or data may be the
> target of a relocation record).
>
> So I would suggest "__image_load_end" or "__image_copy_end".

Thanks. I will go with __image_copy_end

>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Aneesh
>
> Amicalement,