Hi, On 05/12/16 06:25, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Andre, > > On 4 December 2016 at 18:52, Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> wrote: >> The boot0 hook we have so far is applied _after_ the initial branch >> to the "reset" entry point. An upcoming change requires even this >> branch to be changed, so we apply the hook macro at the earliest >> point, and have the branch in the hook file as well. >> This is no functional change at this point, just refactoring to simplify >> upcoming patches. >> >> Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> >> --- >> arch/arm/cpu/armv8/start.S | 4 ++-- >> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-sunxi/boot0.h | 1 + >> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > Will this not affect other boards which use ARM_SOC_BOOT0_HOOK?
That's a valid question, but the answer is: no. This roughly same mechanism is used by two Broadcom ARMv7 boards, but the usage is different there: they include the boot0.h header file only after the vectors (and not only after the initial branch-to-reset). So this is already different and not compatible between armv7 and armv8 right now, so it's not a regression or change this patch is introducing. I agree it's a bit confusing to have the same header and Kconfig name, but a different behaviour, but I don't see a good solution to unify this. If you do, I am all ears. Cheers, Andre. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
