Dear Scott,
in message <20090526210046.ga4...@b07421-ec1.am.freescale.net> you wrote:
>
> IMHO, it is much better for the information on what needs to be run on
> init to reside in the file that needs to be called, rather than copied to
> a bunch of different arch files.
Then you might end up with another maze of #ifdef's...
> In what practical case would one arch want to run component X before
> component Y, but another want to run component Y before component X? If
Boards are different... see for example "lib_ppc/board.c" - on some
boards (BAB7xx and CPC45) we must initialize PCI early, while on some
others we cannot initialize it that early.
> component X is always supposed to come before component Y, that can be
> done with different levels of initcalls, or just by arranging the
> makefiles appropriately (with a comment warning people not to change it).
The problem is that there is no such fix order. It is board dependent.
> > The Linux way of doing initcalls is useless for U-Boot, as it addres-
> > ses a completely different problem and is based on a completely
> > different memory management model.
>
> Initcalls are not the same thing as init code/data (other than the
> coincidence that in Linux, they would typically reside in such sections).
>
> This has nothing to do with memory management.
But saving memory was one of j24's arguments?
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de
The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should, therefore,
be regarded as a criminal offence.
-- Edsger W. Dijkstra, SIGPLAN Notices, Volume 17, Number 5
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
