On Wed, 2014-04-02 at 09:51 +0530, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote: > On 4/2/2014 3:33 AM, Scott Wood wrote: > > On Mon, 2014-03-31 at 15:34 +0530, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote: > >> nand_spl_load_image() can also be used for non TPL framework. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Prabhakar Kushwaha <prabha...@freescale.com> > >> --- > >> drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_ifc_spl.c | 4 ++-- > >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_ifc_spl.c > >> b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_ifc_spl.c > >> index 2f82f7c..8a7a3a3 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_ifc_spl.c > >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_ifc_spl.c > >> @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ static inline int bad_block(uchar *marker, int port_size) > >> return __raw_readw((u16 *)marker) != 0xffff; > >> } > >> > >> -#ifdef CONFIG_TPL_BUILD > >> +#if defined(CONFIG_TPL_BUILD) || defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD) > >> int nand_spl_load_image(uint32_t offs, unsigned int uboot_size, void > >> *vdst) > >> #else > >> static int nand_load(uint32_t offs, unsigned int uboot_size, void *vdst) > >> @@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ static int nand_load(uint32_t offs, unsigned int > >> uboot_size, void *vdst) > >> * Defines a static function nand_load_image() here, because non-static > >> makes > >> * the code too large for certain SPLs(minimal SPL, maximum size <= > >> 4Kbytes) > >> */ > >> -#ifndef CONFIG_TPL_BUILD > >> +#if !defined(CONFIG_TPL_BUILD) && !defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD) > >> #define nand_spl_load_image(offs, uboot_size, vdst) \ > >> nand_load(offs, uboot_size, vdst) > >> #endif > > When would you ever use this file without having CONFIG_SPL_BUILD > > defined? > > I want to use nand_spl_load_image in spl.c as it is defined in > include/nand.h > > Unfortunately, it is only defined for CONFIG_TPL_BUILD. > If i remove !CONFIG_SPL_BUILD from second place. this will enable > nand_load() which i don't want to use.
I'm not saying to remove !CONFIG_SPL_BUILD. I'm saying to remove the ifdef (and all the nand_load stuff) entirely. > will it be possible to change all nand_load to nand_spl_load_image() > permanently. the only impact I see of "static". > nand_load is static and nand_spl_load_image is not static function > declaration. Yes. It was done on eLBC because using a static function saved a few critical bytes. IFC has more breathing room due to the 8K SPL, so apparently it doesn't need this. -Scott _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
