On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 12:46:58PM +0100, Stefan Roese wrote: > On 19.11.2015 12:19, Nikita Kiryanov wrote: > >Hi Tom, > > > >On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 05:33:20PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > >>On Sun, Nov 08, 2015 at 05:11:51PM +0200, Nikita Kiryanov wrote: > >> > >>>Introduce spl_boot_list array, which defines a list of boot devices > >>>that SPL will try before hanging. By default this list will consist > >>>of only spl_boot_device(), but board_boot_order() can be overridden > >>>by board code to populate the array with custom values. > >>> > >>>Signed-off-by: Nikita Kiryanov <nik...@compulab.co.il> > >>>Cc: Igor Grinberg <grinb...@compulab.co.il> > >>>Cc: Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> > >>>Cc: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > >>>Reviewed-by: Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> > >>>Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > >> > >>So, a problem with this patch is that we push the x600 board, which is > >>an 8KiB SPL target, over the line. I feel like maybe we need a > >>follow-up patch that makes announcing depend not on libcommon (which > >>x600 needs) but something else to know that there's a reason to > >>announce. > > > >Based on the content of your reply I'm guessing you're referring to the > >next patch, not this one. > > > >I suppose that announcing can be made into an optional feature. However, > >I also think that since printing is an optional feature that can greatly > >increase binary size, it shouldn't be coupled with other, often > >non-optional libcommon features the way it currently is via > >CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT. The best fix in my opinion would be to > >implement a way to exclude printing support from SPL even if libcommon > >is included (CONFIG_SPL_SILENT that replaces printfs with empty stubs?). > > > >This will also make it possible to remove all those #ifdef > >CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT checks that appear all over the SPL code. > > I think that my recently posted tiny-printf patches: > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/545034/ > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/545033/ > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/545036/ > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/545035/ > > can solve this size issue on x600 (and perhaps other) board.
If you can see if x600 builds again in mainline that would be good :) -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
