Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Tom, > > In message <4af339e1.9060...@windriver.com> you wrote: >> The arguments for using weak are getting weak :P > > :-P > >> Using weak is less relevant with the #ifdef's > > But it's the wrong direction your heading. We should get rid of > #ifdef's, not add new ones. > > With #ifdef's, you have different versions of the code, which > increases the multitude of configurations that actually need to be > tested. With weak, you have one version of the code only. >
To use the status led api, you have to define CONFIG_STATUS_LED anyway. I did not think this added to the configuration space. >> The benefit now is that boards that use the led functions do >> not have to define all of them. > > That's just an indication of a broken implementation. > > Normally you would provide the weak functions in a central place, > where any board configuration which wants can overwrite them, or not. > >> I am open to ideas on how to kill weak off completely. > > You got it wrong. > > We want to kill off the #ifdef's. > My vector is obviously pointing in the wrong direction.. >> Has a general led driver layer ever been proposed ? >> Something to convert status led for a mixture of #defines and weak >> symbols to something that had a register function and some >> file_ops ? > > We use status LEDs on many boards, without real issues. It's only AT91 > which suffers from this mess. > I withdraw this patch. I will rethink this and come up with something better. Tom > Best regards, > > Wolfgang Denk > _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
