On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Ryan Harkin <ryan.har...@linaro.org> wrote:
>> Didn't I ask for some changes on that PCIe patch? >> > > Good point. I thought you'd grudgingly accepted it, but I see your > last comment was: > > "Yes, thanks. I think it's just a style thing then. We don't do a lot > of static inline nop functions, we do __weak functions in the main file > (and comment about what it should be doing in a real function) and then > provide the strong version in another file. So just the pcie.h part > needs changing then." > > I'll ping Linus about it on his thread and see if he wants to issue a > v2. Then I'll come back to this patch later. Argh, yeah I kind of dropped that patch because I wanted it my way but don't have energy to argue about it... I think it is better that the preprocessor just remove code that is never used than to have the compiler patch out functions at compile time by marking them __weak. It certainly will compile a few cycles quicker. Ryan if you would rather want to do it in the __weak way so as to get things upstream, go ahead. Yours, Linus Walleij _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
