Hi Masahiro, On 20 February 2015 at 19:37, Masahiro YAMADA <yamad...@jp.panasonic.com> wrote: > Hi Simon, > > > 2015-02-21 11:28 GMT+09:00 Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>: >> Hi Masahiro, >> >> On 20 February 2015 at 17:54, Masahiro YAMADA <yamad...@jp.panasonic.com> >> wrote: >>> Hi Simon, Stephen, >>> >>> >>> 2015-02-21 3:39 GMT+09:00 Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On 20 February 2015 at 10:54, Stephen Warren <swar...@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: >>>>> On 02/20/2015 10:06 AM, Simon Glass wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> +Stephen >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Masahiro, >>>>>> >>>>>> On 19 February 2015 at 22:25, Masahiro Yamada <yamad...@jp.panasonic.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Now CONFIG_SPL_BUILD is not defined in Kconfig, so >>>>>>> "!depends on SPL_BUILD" and "if !SPL_BUILD" are redundant. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig >>>>>>> index 41f3220..700e2a8 100644 >>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig >>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig >>>>>>> @@ -739,9 +739,8 @@ config TEGRA >>>>>>> bool "NVIDIA Tegra" >>>>>>> select SUPPORT_SPL >>>>>>> select SPL >>>>>>> - select OF_CONTROL if !SPL_BUILD >>>>>>> - select CPU_ARM720T if SPL_BUILD >>>>>>> - select CPU_V7 if !SPL_BUILD >>>>>>> + select OF_CONTROL >>>>>>> + select CPU_V7 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry if I have missed something here. On Tegra most unfortunately the >>>>>> SPL uses ARMv4t and U-Boot proper uses ARMv7. In fact that is the only >>>>>> reason that Tegra has SPL. Doesn't this change with this commit? >>> >>> >>> No. I think behavior is still the same as before. >>> >>> In a single .config, we cannot define two CPUs in Kconfig. >>> >>> So, we only define CPU_V7, for the main processors. >>> >>> For SPL, we override the "CPU" in config.mk >>> >>> ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD >>> ifdef CONFIG_TEGRA >>> CPU := arm720t >>> endif >>> endif >>> >>> I know what you might be saying is, this is too ugly. Yes. >>> >>> I think we can do a little better with further rafactoring, >>> but the basic idea is, SPL of Tegra is a special case. >>> >> >> Yes I saw that, I understand now. So SPL_BUILD is no longer available >> in Kconfig, but is still available in Makefiles, right? > > Yes, exactly!
This all works fine on Tegra for me. However I like to suggest dropping a few patches in this series. I don't think it is worth using ARCH_MALLOC_F_LEN. In fact for me the Tegra defconfig looks OK and SPL is built correctly. My remaining question is about that Tegra seems to want USE_PRIVATE_LIBGCC for SPL but not for U-Boot. I'm not sure why, nor whether it matters. It seems to work find using it for both. I have pushed my tested tree to u-boot-x86 in branch single-kconfig-for-masahiro. It contains only these patches: ARM: UniPhier: set CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_F to the global default value kconfig: Adjust ordering so that defaults work as expected kconfig: switch to single .config configuration kconfig: remove unneeded dependency on !SPL_BUILD Perhaps we can look at the others later once we get things moved over? I think the SYS_MALLOC_F thing is not that big a deal and not urgent to resolve if we still have a problem. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
