On 2019/7/31 下午3:23, Matthias Brugger wrote:
On 24/07/2019 14:22, Kever Yang wrote:
On 2019/7/24 下午6:22, Simon Goldschmidt wrote:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 12:01 PM Kever Yang <kever.y...@rock-chips.com> wrote:
The board_early_init_r() suppose to be called before board_init(),
then the board callback functions in board_r will be:
- board_early_init_r()
- board_init()
- board_late_init()
Searching through the code, elixir.bootlin.com gives me 52 definitions
of board_early_init_r(). Does this patch break any of those boards
when it changes the order of those calls?
I do have check some of the implement and most of them should be OK, but to be
honest,
I'm don't have any of those boards, and not sure if this break any of them, and
I'm not sure
if people using this interface have notice it's after the board_init().
When I try to use this board_early_init_r(), I thought this is before
board_init(), but it actually
after the board_init(), that make people confusing.
I think the _early_ one should be at the first, isn't it?
I agree. Maybe we should rename it to board_post_init?
Sorry , do you mean add/rename a board_post_init() for what's done by
board_early_init_r() now and then add/move ad board api before board_init()?
There is a board_late_init(), which is after env init, a new
board_post_init() seems
not a good idea.
Here is the Kconfig help for BOARD_EARLY_INIT_R, which also means we it
should
be called before board_init().
config BOARD_EARLY_INIT_R
bool "Call board-specific init after relocation"
help
Some boards need to perform initialisation as directly after
relocation. With this option, U-Boot calls board_early_init_r()
in the post-relocation init sequence.
Thanks,
- Kever
Regards,
Matthias
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
