Hi Tom,

On 19.11.2015 23:11, Tom Rini wrote:
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 :)

Yes, I can confirm, that build with the tiny-printf fixes the
build issue on x600. So once you add this tiny-printf patchset,
I'll send a patch to move x600 over to use this smaller version.

Thanks,
Stefan

_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Reply via email to