On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 08:50:55PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:

> Dear Fabio Estevam,
> 
> In message 
> <caomzo5aj56kvtfrqbd3wq7oip8q3wa0yv4evuzerkxfufvx...@mail.gmail.com> you 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Then shouldn't the patch subject/summary be "print command name only
> > > if cmdtp is not NULL" rather than the quite uninformative "prevent a
> > > crash"?
> > 
> > Yes, I agree that original subject is a bit misleading.
> > 
> > When I read it I thought it was a Wandboard related problem.
> 
> I don't know if it's only Wandboard, or if other boards are affected,
> too (which are these? under which exact test cases?).  In any case.
> the problem is not here, but on the caller's side.  It should not call
> a function which expects a command name with a NULL pointer passed as
> argument.

I looked around at this a bit this morning.  cmd_pxe.c would need a lot
of mangling to pass around cmdtp, just for the sake of an error message
that's then ignored as the caller logic is:
1) Try bootm on the image
2) If CONFIG_CMD_BOOTZ, if bootm returned, maybe we got a zImage?
do_bootz instead (also NULL cmdtp).

The error message wouldn't exactly make sense here either, being invoked
via menu.

-- 
Tom

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Reply via email to